#TwitterBigStick is a hashtag that escalates bad service and bad behaviour by organizations. Thousands have used it to give instant feedback on poor experiences and neglect. It give ordinary people a voice and an instantaneous way of channelling feedback constructively. Ignoring #TwitterBigStick can lead to a severe reputation battering, often in a few hours of retweeting.

#TwitterBigStick is a crowd-sourced initiative that is run and governed by the crowd. It tries to stay entirely neutral and has no vested interests whatsoever. There is no attempt to profit from this endeavor, and there should be none in future. It has been initiated for the general good, because ordinary people are fed up of neglect and of being taken for granted as customers and users. Tweets and retweets are entirely voluntary, and people join in when they feel they want to. There is no central plan here – it’s just a hashtag.

#TwitterBigStick is trying to keep this feedback clean and genuine. As with any crowd-sourced initiative, abuses will no doubt occur. It is for the collective to decide what is credible and what is not, and what complaints to support by replying, mentioning or retweeting. There is no central authority of any sort.

#TwitterBigStick is being supported daily by leading social media influencers and journalists (as well as some CEOs!).

#TwitterBigStick is currently aimed at organizations with a brand to manage and a reputation to protect. It puts the spotlight on any failures in their service delivery and corporate behavior, as highlighted by their customers and users.

Many organizations have responded positively to online complaints and have engaged with the idea, seeing it as a valuable real-time feedback tool. Despite their positive engagement, they too will stay on the radar.

To date, organizations that have responded with promises to address issues include:

The United Nations
British High Commission Kenya
DHL Kenya
KCB Group
Safaricom Ltd
Airtel Kenya
Orange Kenya
Yu Kenya
Bata Kenya
BM Security
Strathmore University
Kianda Foundation
Riara Schools
Kenya Railways
Zuku
DSTv Kenya
Braeburn Schools
Ashleys
Wells Fargo Kenya
G4S
Regent Management
Nation Media Group
The Mortgage Company
Kenya Airways

Related posts:

1. Organizations: prepare for online firestorms in 2012
2. Why the standard CV hides what we really need to know
3. Large organizations: that long queue demonstrates only your inefficiency

“The Italian cruise ship the Costa Concordia sank off the coast of Tuscany last Friday night, after smashing into rocks off the island of Giglio. The 114,500-tonne vessel, carrying 3,200 passengers and 1,000 crew, hit a submerged reef at 9.42pm, after the ship’s captain, Francesco Schettino, had steered it to within 200m of shore to “salute” a retired colleague who lived on the island. The rocks ripped a 50m gash in the Costa Concordia’s hull. The ship began to list, and the captain steered it into shallow water close to a headland. At 12.30am, it suddenly capsized. As of Wednesday, 11 people had been confirmed dead and 21 were still missing.”

The Week (January 21, 2012)

We all know about the Italian cruise ship disaster – the image of the capsized luxury liner lying marooned off the Tuscany coast was on our TV screens for many days.

However, those aspiring to leadership would do well to focus on an even bigger disaster, the man whose version of leadership caused this tragedy that has led to so many unnecessary deaths: captain Francesco Schettino.

First, consider that this gentleman caused this disaster reportedly because he was using the ship to ‘salute’ a friend who lived on the island. How many leaders similarly misuse their positions and resources to feed their own egos or private aims? Leadership is not a personal enterprise; it involves taking heavy responsibility for the lives and livelihoods of others.

Second, note the captain’s laxity in taking the problem seriously. Reports suggest Schettino was terribly slow to react to the disaster, even though the ship had suffered a huge gash in its side. He is said to have told the coastguard that it was just a “technical failure”; he is alleged to have then ordered a meal for himself and a female companion; he only sent out a mayday call at 10.30 pm; and did not give the order to abandon ship until nearly 11 pm. By then the boat was listing so sharply that many lifeboats could not be lowered. It was too late to save lives.

This type of denial is also ego-related. Too many leaders are utterly loath to admit to any mistake, and in the process will worsen the problem. Honest leadership requires coming clean, quickly. If you’ve messed up, say so and get on with the more important imperative of damage control. Don’t dance around denying there’s a problem. Look at so many CEOs across the world in 2011, and you will see that this kind of dance is very common.

Lastly, and most egregiously, the captain is accused of abandoning his ship: an audio recording from the Italian coastguard, widely heard across the world’s media, suggests he left his sinking vessel with his two senior officers while hundreds of passengers were still trapped on board. He is reported to have told magistrates, in comical justification of this cowardice, that he “tripped and fell into a lifeboat.”

Again, a profound lesson is contained therein. If you have created a problem, stay to fix it and bear the consequences. If you have enjoyed the perks of leadership, you must carry the burdens as well. Too many business leaders float away from the problems they create, often with handsome payoffs. In Schettino’s case, there is no such luxury. He will face manslaughter charges. The business world similarly needs a system of repercussions for incompetence and mismanagement. At the top, there is much upside and little downside.

In the meantime, the words “Vada a bordo, cazzo!” have become famous in Italy. They were uttered repeatedly by the furious head of the Livorno port authority when ordering Schettino back onto his stricken ship.

I’ll leave you to go online to learn what the words mean. Let’s just say they could apply to many a political and corporate leader, too.

Related posts:

1. If you think leadership is all about you, you’re dead wrong
2. Do you understand the true nature of leadership?
3. The Challenge of Leadership – a talk at the University of Nairobi, Friday 30 January

Looking at Apple’s fourth-quarter 2011 results is enough to boggle the mind. Which company do you know that grows its revenues at more than 70%; that sells a million (expensive) iPhones every three days; that sells more phones every day than there are babies born in the world; and that is currently worth more than two Wal-Marts?

Having created this gravity-defying money machine, Founder Steve Jobs will surely become the most studied CEO in history; but I sometimes wonder whether this is a productive exercise. He was one of life’s one-offs: a maverick; an iconoclast; a near-pathological control freak. Who is going to repeat that combination?

Nevertheless there are things he believed in that should make us all sit up and pay attention. I found one such belief in his biography, written by Walter Isaacson. Here it is:

“From his father Steve Jobs learned that a hallmark of passionate craftsmanship is making sure that even the aspects that will remain hidden are done beautifully…”I want it to be as beautiful as possible, even if it’s inside the box. A great carpenter isn’t going to use lousy wood for the back of a cabinet, even though no one’s going to see it…you’ll know it’s there…for you to sleep well at night…the quality has to be carried all the way through.”"

I’m clapping. Are you? No shoddy quality, even for the invisible parts? Why? Because YOU WILL KNOW it’s shoddy at the back. Now that, ladies and gentlemen, is called having a personal standard. It matters not a jot whether people will EVER see your standard; the point is, you have to maintain it. For yourself, and your own peace of mind.

Steve Jobs was famous for wanting even the inner circuit boards in his Macintosh computers to not just work well, but look good. Why, when no one would ever see them in there? Because HE would know they weren’t right, and HE would feel he had let himself down.

Now look around you. Who on earth lives up to this principle? Pretty much no one. Take a look at big buildings in Nairobi. Most of them will have a very shoddy rear wall – often even unpainted. The reception may look nice, but walk down to the basement car parking: unfinished floors, unpainted walls.

Big Nairobi hotels have flamboyant common areas, but you don’t ever want to visit most inner working areas and staff quarters, where guests are not allowed to venture. You would be shocked by most of what you see. Only the very best hotels care about the staff areas.

Most people, simply put, cannot live up to the principle of “quality all the way through.” They are just putting up a facade, a shopfront, an illusion of grandeur and nobility. The minute something is not seen by others, it is neglected and abused.

A caveat: even Steve Jobs’ Apple doesn’t live up to this total-quality ideal fully. Its products exude sophistication, inside and out; but its supply-chain practices do not. Manufacturing is outsourced to China, and there are well-documented examples of egregious working conditions in its partner companies. To its credit, Apple is cracking down using a strict supplier code, but there is some way to go.

Nonetheless: please apply the “back of the cabinet” principle to your life and your organization. The visible parts may have a nice sheen to them. What about the invisible ones? How much quality and nobility is there in the bits the world doesn’t see? True greatness lies in being the same throughout. It is a standard few of us can live up to. So go and examine the backs of the cabinets of your life today, and think about what you really stand for.

Related posts:

1. It’s good to be young – but better to be effective
2. We have a long way to go in product quality
3. Obama’s victory could change the world

“1. Reading stories can fine-tune your social skills by helping you better understand other human beings.
2. Entering imagined worlds builds empathy and improves your ability to take another person’s point of view.
3. A love affair with narrative may gradually alter your personality—in some cases, making you more open to new experiences and more socially aware.”

KEVIN OATLEY, Scientific American Mind (November 20, 2011)

I have often advocated the reading of novels not just as a pastime, but as a method of making you better at running your business. This was mostly just gut-instinct, as I have always been an avid lover of great fiction.

But now I have proof.

Studies done by psychology Kevin Oatley and his associates (a recent one is quoted in the excerpt) reveal great practical benefits to be derived from reading fictional works. The reason is simple: good fiction gives you an invaluable tool – a better understanding of human beings, their emotions and motivations.

Think about it: creating a great business these days is less about great technology, structures or processes. Those are not the problem, nor are they scarce. The thing that sets great organizations apart from merely good ones is the ability to engage people – staff and customers – thoroughly and wholeheartedly. It’s about inspiring others to give their best, and to feel included and integral to the work. And that’s where fiction comes in.

A lifelong habit of reading great novels exposes the mind to many more human dramas than are available in person. It enables a deeper understanding of the human animal and its subtle psychological nuances. That understanding will help you deal with people much, much better – and in business these days, it’s the people, stupid.

Oatley’s studies suggest that people who read more fiction are, amongst other things, better at perceiving emotion and reading social cues. How does this happen? Prolonged exposure to fiction, MRI scans reveal, open up neuronal pathways in the brain that assist in the understanding of human emotion.

Anne Kreamer, reviewing this work in the Harvard Business Review recently, put it nicely: “It’s when we read fiction that we have the time and opportunity to think deeply about the feelings of others, really imagining the shape and flavour of alternate worlds of experience.”

Truly great novelists have a very sharp eye when it comes to watching the way people live, relate and interact. They are able to weave this understanding into their characters and plot and dramatic structure, to create a product leaves the brain stimulated in a way few other experiences can deliver.

As I have written on this page in the past: “Business is about life, and so is fiction. The great businessperson must understand people, their driving emotions, their ambitions and their fears, and what causes their rise or fall. A great novelist delivers precisely that understanding. If you want to know your employees and their motivations better; if you want to comprehend the lives of your customers better; if indeed you want to do the Socratic thing and know yourself better; you could do worse than crack open a great novel by a great writer.”

So what are you going to do, folks? Let’s be realistic: those who hate fiction aren’t suddenly going to run out to buy Dickens and Tolstoy. Love of novels is generally created and sealed in childhood. But those who do read novels need no longer regard it as a guilty pleasure: it’s probably a vital tool in helping you run things better. For those who don’t read “made-up” stories, you’re going to have to find other ways of being exposed to the swirl of human emotion all around you, and figuring it out.

Fiction may be a lie, but as Stephen King pointed out, good fiction is the truth within the lie.

Related posts:

1. Want to learn about business? Read a novel
2. What your board should do in a downturn
3. Books are the key to a better life

A few weeks ago I predicted that 2012 would be the year of the “Twitter Big Stick” in Kenya: a time when both politicians and large organizations feel the force of feedback from social media.

I pointed out that the reason for this is that the little people – customers, users, voters – now have networked little devices in their pockets. Most of these mobile gadgets have cameras attached, and are connected to global social media platforms. A single tweet complaining about your organization can therefore reach tens of thousands of people in just hours, if not minutes.

Don’t believe me on this one, Kenyan CEOs? Well, it’s already happening.

In recent months, many corporations have had to undertake humiliating U-turns after new proposals caused social media explosions. Take Netflix in the US. This very successful company suddenly announced plans to split up its businesses and charge more for each service. The resulting Twitter uproar amongst its user base was deafening, with thousands threatening immediate cancellations. Guess what? The company reversed course, but the damage was done.

Bank of America announced a new $5 monthly debit card charge – but changed its mind fast once a social-media storm focused its attention. Gap was forced to recall a new logo – after seeing all the derision it excited. Verizon’s ill-thought-out $2 online-payments charge didn’t even make it past 24 hours. And HP announced plans to ditch its personal-computer business – but found surprisingly high levels of support for its PCs on social media, and decided to keep the division going (after dumping its CEO instead).

Are these all foreign examples, not applicable here, I hear you saying? Well, Kenya Power faced widespread derision from its customer base online when it launched a new brand – minus any appreciable improvement in customer service and supply reliability. Local ISPs who use blatantly misleading marketing in launching new offerings are feeling the heat every day.

A localized dispute between business directory Mocality and Google here in Kenya last week took just hours to spread around “Twitterville” and elsewhere, and was all over leading global online news media the same day, forcing Google to issue a quick apology and the promise of a thorough investigation.

So don’t doubt it: the Twitter Big Stick is swinging. If your organization routinely frustrates its customers, makes them swelter in queues, mis-sells its products, or allows its staff to engage in anti-social practices – await the online caning. Which will be very, very bad for your reputation and your business.

What this heralds is a startling sea-change in the relationship between organizations and their customers. The little Davids are able to connect virtually in a way they never could physically, and teach many a Goliath a stinging lesson.

Is this always a good thing? No, because abuse is possible and in some cases consumers should not have so much say in company decisions. However, in an environment where customer abuse is rampant and bad service the norm, the social-media firestorms will mostly do a great deal of good. Businesses will be forced to remember why they exist in the first place – to deliver unique value to customers.

Good organizations should prepare themselves now. Take a fresh look at what causes anger and frustration in your customer base, and act on it before you spark any uproar to avoid severe reputational damage. Be more honest and open in your dealings with customers in this new, more transparent world. Embrace feedback, no matter how robust, and use it to become better and stronger. Think hard about your own social-media presence and strategy.

The good organizations who care about their reputations will be the first to use this development positively. For the rest, only prolonged online caning will discipline them. It should be a fascinating year.

Related posts:

1. Organizations, be very afraid of social media
2. Large organizations: that long queue demonstrates only your inefficiency
3. Here’s a little secret about sustained product success

“I long ago realised that to understand a business I would learn much more by talking to people involved in day-to-day operations than the chief executive. They represented “what is really going on here?”"

JOHN KAY, Financial Times (January 3, 2011)

The excerpt shown, from Professor John Kay’s regular FT column, caught my eye. I agree wholeheartedly. To truly understand a business don’t talk to its CEO. At least, not at first.

I have spent the better part of my life looking at and into businesses, and trying to figure them out. And it is true: most CEOs are not equipped to tell you the truth about their businesses.

Years ago, when I was still an active management consultant, I was asked to come and offer advice to a very successful, rapidly growing business. My response was simple: “Fine, but I won’t come to head office first. Please arrange for me to tour customer-facing facilities, talk to customers, talk to front-line staff. Only then, much later, will I come for discussions with the CEO.”

The CEO agreed, and we have had a mutually interesting relationship for years.

Most CEOs, by their nature, operate on feel-good statements. They are required to be optimists exuding positivity. They spend most of their time persuading shareholders, investors, regulators and the media to believe in their mission. They operate at the level of the vision statement and the list of corporate values. They talk loftily and aim for the stars. Don’t mock them for this – inspiring others is part of the deal in leadership.

Anyone wishing to get a true understanding of how a business works and a clear picture of its position in its industry, however, must seek out other voices. The most important of these is the voice of the customer, the person who spends money on the product and feels the value, or not, of what is being produced most acutely. Equally important is the potential customer – the person who could buy the company’s product but currently doesn’t. “Why not?” is a crucial question to put to this party.

And then we take our enquiries to employees, big and small. Especially small. Many CEOs think their staff resemble a happy-clappy church where employees are imbued with overwhelming belief in their boss and his vision, and would rather work in his organization than any other. A few candid minutes with junior employees usually explodes that notion.

Lastly, don’t ever forget to talk to competitors. If you are an acute observer, talking to a company’s rivals will reveal a great deal about its true strengths and weaknesses.

Customers, staff, competitors – and then the CEO. It’s a good rule for consultants, analysts, investors, students and business journalists. It’s almost never followed. Most allow themselves to be swept up in the boss-man’s hubris and buy the story wholesale. Remember, most chief executives are seasoned charmers and missionaries: they can spin the tale. They often even believe it, wholesale. It is part of their role to marshall the troops, generate energy and inspiration in others. Unfortunately, they often do this at the expanse of reality.

If you really want to understand a business, work backwards. Look at what it produces, and what value it adds to the lives of its users and consumers. Look at those who don’t buy the product, and study what they buy instead. Look at the people who do the producing, and study their engagement and commitment to their work. Look at competitors, and study the differences and similarities. If you find truly distinctive elements in the business model, and gauge unusual levels of satisfaction in the workplace and the shopfront, then you may be on to something good.

Then, by all means, have coffee with the chief executive.

Related posts:

1. Should you walk the talk, or talk the walk?
2. Is your CEO just a big baby?
3. Did your CEO just win an award? Start worrying…

In Kenya there are Big People, and there are Little People. There are very few Big People, and very, very many Little People. The Big People call all the shots and make all the decisions, and the Little People obey.

The slightly bigger Little People spend all their time and effort trying to become Big People, because if you are one of the Little People in Kenya you are nothing. It doesn’t matter how you became one of the Big People, as long as you are Big.

Big People have many privileges. They ride ‘back-left’ in limousines, while Little People ‘kaa square’ in matatus. Big People do not have to obey normal traffic rules and do not notice the gridlock around them, because they use journey time to rest and work in air-conditioned comfort. Little People lose several hours a day marooned on clogged-up roads. But that’s fine, because the Little People’s time doesn’t really matter.

Big People are exempt from queues and general inconvenience. They can go to the front automatically and be served first, as all the Little People will make way for them. Big People do not have to be searched or subjected to security checks, because they are too Big for that. A Little Person attempting to impose any inconvenience on a Big Person will soon be made a Tiny Person.

Big People do not pay taxes. They are either given official exemptions, or they find more creative ways of escaping the net. Little People pay lots of taxes and pay for everything that the Big People do.

Big People do not go to jail. They commit many crimes, but are too Big to be punished. As a result, they commit even more crimes and become even Bigger. Little People are punished immediately for even the smallest misdemeanour, unless they are protected by Big People.

Big People are surrounded by lots of Little People called aides, assistants, drivers, bodyguards and relatives. These Little People protect the Big People from other Little People, and in return are made to feel like Slightly Big People.

Big People learned long ago that there are many more Little People than there are Big People. They realized that the only way to keep Little People from noticing they outnumber the Big People was to keep them in separate pens called Tribes. Once the Little People were herded into these special pens, they could be controlled easily by the Big People who would warn them about the danger that comes from other Little People in other pens.

The good news for the Little People is that things may be about to change for them. For one thing, more than half of the Little People are now Very Young People, because the Older Little People had been too active in procreating Little People. For another, the Little People now carry Little Devices that allow them to connect to all the world’s Little People. This has allowed the Little People to realize that being forcibly kept Little is backward and primitive.

Many more of the Little People are also becoming Medium People, and are asking why the Big People have it all their own way. They are asking pesky questions and refusing to fetch the ball for the Big People. The Little People are now realizing that they don’t have to be so Little after all. Some of the Big People are also realizing that the exclusive Big life is not sustainable.

Someday soon, Kenya will become a country for All People, where every person lives under the same rules and has the same rights; where anyone who has earned it on merit can become bigger; and where what is good for All People is what is done. Then, we will read in our history books about the bad old days when only Big People mattered.

Related posts:

1. A big thank-you to all the decent people out there
2. Like Obama, we must remake our country
3. In Africa, Big Brother watches us all

I have a Friday 13th date with Jeff Koinange on his famous bench, K24 TV Capital Talk. The show will be aired at 8.00 pm Friday, repeated 10.30 pm. Also repeated Saturday morning, 9.00 am, and Sunday evening, 10.30 pm. It will also run on www.YouTube.com/K24TV.

Related posts:

1. Come and meet me at the Storymoja Hay Festival, Impala Club, Friday 31 July
2. ‘Thought Leadership’: A new weekly column for the Business Daily
3. Discussing Crown Your Customer on KTN

Since the mid-80s, academics have been carrying out regular skills surveys, asking detailed questions of thousands of employees. In 1986…72% of professionals felt they had a great deal of independence in doing their jobs. By 2006, that had plummeted to just 38%.
Which is shocking but also makes sense: if you’re a teacher you now have to work to a national curriculum. If you’re a bank manager you have far fewer individual powers than your predecessor would have had in the 80s. And if you’re a teller, it’s standard practice to work from a script.

ADITYA CHAKRABORTTY, www.guardian.co.uk (Dec 19, 2011)

Aditya Chakrabortty pointed out an interesting aspect of modern life in The Guardian recently: the more variety we enjoy as consumers, the less autonomy we enjoy as employees.

It is not a surprise that most blue-collar workers in large companies have little say in the work that they do. As enterprises have become more complex and more far-flung, consistency across units is paramount. When you are producing multiple product lines across multiple geographies, you cannot afford to have inconsistencies in quality and customer experience. Having a rigid, centrally defined process for everything is the path that most complex organizations have taken to address this problem. This means that the workers at the coalface simply do as they are told – there is no room for experimentation, flexibility or creativity.

The more recent phenomenon is that white-collar workers, including very senior executives, often suffer the same loss of independence. They, too, are tightly controlled from a powerful centre; they, too are permitted few decisions; they, too have to work like cogs in the system.

As a customer, you may have encountered the consequences of this. The bank manager, for example, who cannot make an exception on your loan application simply because he can’t overrule the process; the chief executive who can’t make any adjustment to his local product despite overwhelming data suggesting the global one is not what’s needed in his patch; the team leader who is powerless to make any meaningful change to the rewards flowing to his team members.

Where is this leading? Customers are increasingly facing faceless organizations where the person dealing with you, and that person’s next five superior officers, are unable to make any meaningful decision. All they can do is feed your information into the opaque system, and await a reply.

Certainly, this reduces fraud and poor local decisions; it automates mundane tasks; it makes products and services cheaper. But it also means that the number of people who actually think, create, innovate and make decisions is shrinking. Academics foresee a world in which perhaps just 10 per cent of the world’s workforce has “permission to think.” The rest simply have to do as they’re told. After decades of massive expansion in education across the globe, we may be heading back to an assembly-line model; the difference being that the worker drones are now well-educated graduates.

This phenomenon is going to trouble many an ambitious employee; it will trouble many a customer who wants a meaningful emotional engagement with a business; and it should trouble many a thoughtful leader. Good luck in keeping the best people when your business model disallows them from thinking or contributing ideas.

As 2012 unfolds, I suggest this should be one of the top issues challenging chief executives: how do you manage smooth and consistent delivery without turning your best people into drones and clones?

It also offers a huge opportunity to startups. Big, global businesses are going to struggle, really struggle, in offering human interactions to their customers. They are going to struggle to motivate their best people to be accept being mere ghosts in the machine. And that gives you every chance to thrive by playing on those very weaknesses. Go for it.

Related posts:

1. Why are managers unable to make employees love their work?
2. Kissing at work? Leave me out, please…
3. Angry at work? It’s affecting all your decisions…

We are becoming a country of queues. Wherever you look, and wherever you go, people are standing in queues. Increasingly long queues. What is a queue? A place where a long-suffering user or customer gets increasingly annoyed with your organization and your brand.

Given how widespread this problem is, it always amazes me how little attention management teams give it. You, the reader, have almost certainly stood in a long queue somewhere recently: a bank, a government agency, an airline check-in counter, a utility firm, a supermarket or large store, a bus station, a hospital, a hotel reception, an immigration line – and many others. How did you feel?

If the queue was short and moved quickly, you probably felt fine. If the queue was long and moved slowly, however, you were undoubtedly filled with increasing frustration and annoyance towards the service provider who had corralled you there. Most customers have a common complaint: a huge number of customers in the hall, but only one or two counters open.

Managers, why is this not a big deal for you? There are angry people in queues all around us, but hardly any thought is given to queue mitigation. There is often a fatalism at work here, which perceives this phenomenon as somehow natural, too expensive or too difficult to deal with. Perversely, there is also a triumphalism I find in some management teams – a feeling that long queues are indicative of success (“we must be good if so many people line up for us.”)

Both perspectives are fallacious. The queue problem is neither insurmountable nor commendable. A queue is not proof of popularity. It is a management challenge, and your inability to address it only demonstrates failure. It is also deeply inefficient; how much revenue is lost by making people queue up unnecessarily and possibly abandon you; and how much expensive goodwill gained through good advertising and PR is squandered daily on the shopfloor?

The truth is, a thoughtful management team can come up with several ways of reducing and managing queues. All these approaches involve intelligent combinations of technology and people.

First, work the technology. Many Kenyan organizations have done this: banks have introduced ATMs and online transactions; service providers have allowed for mobile money payments. But it is not enough. Many managers are still wondering why the queues don’t diminish. The answer is that you have not sold and communicated the new channels well enough. Most customers require serious hand-holding before they trust a new technology, and this is rarely provided.

Second, rethink the people equation. Introducing new technology is not just a chance to reduce your headcount costs; it is a golden opportunity to enhance the customer experience. Having fewer tellers may save you salaries; but they add huge costs in lost goodwill. Intelligent peak traffic measurement is needed, and rarely seems to be done.

Third, try new approaches. Top global organizations are introducing handheld checkouts, so that a sale can be clocked anywhere in the shop. They are introducing self-checkout / self check-in lanes for more tech-savvy customers. They are pre-scanning shopping baskets to reduce time at the till. They are deploying staff to act as queue-busters: keeping customers engaged and directing people to the correct line and the next available counter. They are isolating the most common causes of holdups, and addressing them.

There are many interesting ways to reduce queues. The first step is to realize you can and should reduce them. Users of your service are not cattle lined up for milking; they are human beings with things to do and places to be. Most people do not get any inherent pleasure from being at your premises; they want to complete their business and leave quickly. It is your duty to make that happen.

Related posts:

1. Still taking customers for granted? Look out…
2. Organizations, be very afraid of social media
3. We have a long way to go in product quality