Richard DaveyRichard DaveyJuly 18, 2019
tine-ivanic-u2d0BPZFXOY-unsplash-1280x853.jpg

9min136

Customer service is a vital part of obtaining and retaining business.

In fact, 73 percent of buyers indicate that Customer Experience is an important factor in their purchasing decisions. To ensure they are servicing their customers in the best way possible, many brands are looking towards Customer Recovery Loops to prevent customer churn and improve CX.

As with any new initiative, it’s important to have a clear understanding of what success would look like before getting started. As a business, you want to have smart, realistic goals in place that give you something tangible to aim for and continually measure against, to ensure genuine progress is being made.

That said, in the world of CX, some indicators of success are easier to track than others. Measuring the effectiveness of your Customer Recovery Loop may seem tricky, so here are five ways to check if your Customer Recovery Loop is working for you.

1. Repeat customers

Far too often, brands have their data siloed, meaning that they’re not getting the full picture when analysing the success of their Recovery Loop. The technology now exists to enable companies to link their customer feedback with any existing data they hold, including key things like purchase history, to provide a single view of the customer.

If you can establish that your unhappy customers have continued to buy from your business after going through a recovery loop, that’s proof of its success – and a big win for your company! Companies need to ensure they’re using all the information at their disposal when checking if a strategy is working.

2. Reduced customer churn and complaints

It’s no secret that complaints can hit a business hard, particularly those that are escalated to regulatory bodies. It’s vitally important to take preventative measures as soon as possible to stop these problems from escalating further. By intervening and taking action promptly, brands can mitigate the cost of such penalties.

With that in mind, it’s best practice for companies to take note of their typical customer churn rates, complaint numbers and, if applicable, regulatory ratings. From there, it’s possible to set goals for improvements and give yourself targets to aim for. Half the battle with analysing the success of your Customer Recovery Loop is simply understanding the key metrics that represent success and tracking improvement against them. If you can track trends in the data that show customer churn or complaints are decreasing since your Recovery Loop was implemented, that’s a sure-fire sign it’s working.

3. Scoring higher

There are lots of different metrics that companies will use to judge success across different aspects of the business. Often, these will differ depending on the industry or business you’re working in, the people you’re reporting in to or even the stage of the customer journey you’re monitoring. Regardless of what your preferred metric is, what matters is to take note of the numbers when you first decide to deploy a Recovery Loop.

Ultimately, what’s important to everyone in the business is seeing those scores go up – whether they’re Customer Satisfaction or Net Promoter Score matters not; improved scores will positively impact the bottom line.

4. Reducing cost

One of the main considerations when justifying any business decision is cost – companies want to see a return on their investment. While it needn’t be expensive, a Recovery Loop is still an investment, and customer service teams will still want to see the financial benefits of their decision. Cost per contact and call handling times can be significantly reduced by capturing feedback in real-time, proactively keeping customers informed, and putting preventative measures in place for reoccurrence.

By empowering frontline staff with the right information and the tools they need to assist customers effectively, they can reduce the average handling time and cost of each call. Over time, this could lead to fewer calls and greater savings.

5. Better-engaged employees

The key to great customer service is that happy employees lead to happy customers and vice-versa. So much so, that McKinsey & Company has reported that companies that make a concerted effort to improve their CX also see employee engagement rates rise 20 percent on average. Frontline call centre staff will often be who a customer first engages with, so it’s important to get it right. First impressions are everything. If customers are coming to the brand with a problem, they need to be greeted with empathetic and knowledgeable staff to help them – but it’s up to the business to arm them with the tools they need!

At the beginning of your journey, capturing the voice of your employees as well as your customers in real-time can often add meaningful context to your customer feedback. For instance, if a customer complains that their payment was taken late, whilst your employee flags that the billing process is manual and time consuming, you have some context. This information can be used not just to improve the customer experience but to help out staff as well. Measuring employee satisfaction scores, staff retention, and productivity can help to see if the changes you’re making are having the desired impact. If not, you are then in a position to tweak accordingly.

In summary, checking whether or not your Customer Recovery Loop is working comes down to planning and metrics. You need to get a sense of the key metrics that measure the success of a Recovery Loop for your business. From there, you’ll have the base stats to compare and a benchmark to aim for, so that you can confidently say your Customer Recovery Loop is effective.


Paul AinsworthPaul AinsworthJuly 18, 2019
computer-3368242_1280-1280x853.jpg

3min163

A failure by firms to consider Employee Experience is leading to staff not realising the value of workplace technology investments.

That is the finding of the Digital Wellbeing survey, comissioned by Avanade, which revealed that rather than empowering employees, the proliferation of new technologies can cause confusion, leading to a lack of adoption.

Of those surveyed, only 39 percent are embracing modern workplace technology like Slack, Teams, WebEx, and Skype, while an overwhelming proportion remain wedded to more dated technology like email (73 percent). This is preventing businesses from bringing about the productivity gains and improvements in Employee Experience (EX) they expect from their technology investments.

The study was carried out by YouGov, analysing the working habits of 1,000 UK professionals. It showed that adoption, ROI, and value are all impacted when technology is implemented without consideration for EX. The study also found that while 68 percent of employees react positively to new technologies, only 39 percent actually use them on a regular basis.

Almost two-thirds of employees believe that new workplace technologies are being deployed without consideration of their needs, and they feel this is something HR should contribute in partnership with IT.

Stanley Louw, UKI head of digital innovation at Avanade, said: “We see the workplace as the new frontier for competitive advantage and a driver of sustainable growth. Worryingly, the study shows that while businesses continue to invest heavily in Customer Experience (CX), many are still underinvesting in EX. Considering that employees play a major role in delivering CX this would appear counter-intuitive. Poor EX can also impact engagement, creativity and ultimately wellbeing.

“New technologies offer new capabilities which, not only provide opportunities to improve the way employees work, but also create new ways of working. Successful organisations are those which work with employees to help them understand the relevance new technologies have for them and their specific role, identifying how day-to-day processes and activities can be improved by incorporating these new capabilities.”


David BovisDavid BovisJuly 18, 2019
car-repair-362150_1280-1280x853.jpg

12min131

The author of this article, David Bovis, is a judge at the 2019 UK Business Awards.

 

 

 

 

“We cannot reasonably expect that any one should readily and obsequiously quit his own opinion, and embrace ours with a blind resignation to an authority which the understanding of man acknowledges not. For, however it may often mistake, it can own no other guide but reason, not blindly submit to the will and dictates of another. If he you would bring over to your sentiments be one that examines before he assents, you must give him leave at his leisure to go over the account again, and, recalling what is out of his mind, examine the particulars, to see on which side the advantage lies; and if he will not think over arguments of weight enough to engage him anew in so much pains, it is but what we do often ourselves in the like case; and we should take it amiss if others should prescribe to us what points we should study: and if he be one who wishes to take opinions upon trust, how can we imagine that he should renounce those tenets that time and custom have settled in his mind that he thinks them self-evident, and of an unquestionable certainty…” 

John Locke (1632 – 1704)

“You cannot impose anything on anyone and expect them to be committed to it.”

Edgar Schein, Professor Emeritus, MIT Sloan School

“Those who have a ‘why’ to live can bear with almost any ‘how'” 

Viktor Frankl (1902-1997)

Isn’t it time to take this wisdom, apparent across centuries, and introduce leaders to the biology and psychology that can now deliver the facts to support such observations?

The paradox is this: the neuroscience and psychology at play, which interprets the presence of anything ‘new’ (e.g. language) as a threat (to status, ego, ID), cannot be understood and addressed by those unaware of the principles they themselves are subject to, via their own brains.

In other words, if you don’t understand the transition a human brain goes through in a change environment, you can’t hope to adequately plan, manage, or lead change effectively (i.e. address the barriers to change), in yourself or others.

The bottom line is that this significantly impacts the bottom line.

Change initiatives go over budget, over time, deliver less than expected, and fail to develop internal teams. Knowledge transfer is superficial, based in logic and tools. This doesn’t provide the catalyst for a shift in a leaders beliefs. We look at only a part of a system (process/technology) and fail to re-define ‘good’ when considering a broader system (people/process/technology).

In practice, we see leaders express an interest in knowing more about effective and efficient organisational change, but the pre-conditioned expectation within the market, is that ‘change’ is something done by consultants and teaching tools.

When it’s suggested there might be more to it, which requires a higher level of engagement and understanding, the coping strategy in an already busy, intellectually challenging, politically charged, full-time role – that also challenges the work-life balance of the leader – is denial/avoidance.

The problem with this is that a leader’s brain (despite multiple claims to the contrary) is still an adult-mammalian brain and it doesn’t adapt (form new wiring patterns…i.e. learn) by letting other brains have an experience. It ‘learns/adapts’ in response to it’s own sensory stimulus.

I truly believe it’s time we raise the bar and introduce language into the mainstream which allows us to have informed conversations about ‘change’, where people are recognised as the primary and major part of the ‘complex system of complex systems’.

We can put this subject under any banner – OCM, HR, Leadership, Systems Thinking, or Lean – but the label is less important than the change of action urgently required – globally!

So, how do we break through the psychological barriers that stop leaders assimilating knowledge from current experience to use as justification against the need to know more?

It’s a bit like diagnosing a fault in a car. When the basic mechanics and relationships between the various parts is understood, the driver’s approach toward the driving and maintenance of the vehicle is more likely to change than it is in the case of a driver who cannot comprehend cause and effect throughout the system (including their own attitude and behaviour).

The driver might notice certain quirks of the car – i.e. it won’t start when cold – but if they knew about the viscosity of oil and the drop in capacitance in a battery in lower temperatures, they wouldn’t have to talk in loose terms about the issues, and they could be much more effective in addressing problems.

It’s like that with people – if we can talk about dopamine and the triggers related to its presence (tangible, evidence-based science), we don’t have to talk about ‘motivation’ and ‘engagement’ as if those words in and of themselves are enough to inform corrective action.

So, let’s unpack the car analogy a little.

If a person drives fast and erratically, it might be for any number of reasons. They might be a young man aiming to impress and attract a mate (peacocking), or, the driver might be insecure in themselves and therefore lacking confidence behind the wheel, leading to an inner narrative that reinforces their inadequacy, which manifests in them trying to get the journey – any journey – over as quickly as possible.

Driving whilst fearful/panicking, in response to a low self-concept, can lead to different parts of the brain engaging and reducing the energy available for the parts required to drive well, and diverting glucose energy away from the pre-frontal cortex and executive function, leading to a lower level of awareness and a failure to indicate at roundabouts or perform the mirror-signal manoeuvre.

This is because mirrors and other drivers don’t feature in the mind of someone acting from a position of insecurity/fear.

Now, if that person is one of your drivers (i.e. is in charge of company equipment that has to perform a task as part of a process, like a lathe operator in a factory or computer operator in an office) and your focus is on fuel efficiency, tyre-wear rates, and the amount of brake pads you get through each year (i.e. KPIs), do you address the design of the metaphorical wheels, tyres, engine or fuel?

Do you look at the route the vehicle has to follow? Do you provide the driver a new set of tools to analyse the route or change the tyres and brake pads faster?

Or do you understand the emotional predisposition of the human behind the wheel and what is causing them to respond/act the way they do, and if they will be able to adapt to the presence of the new tools or integrate the principles of those tools into their world view, such that they are able to apply them for a sufficient amount of time to allow their use to become natural?

The popular approach in the market for the last few decades has been focused on the application of Tools and Techniques, keeping Process and Procedure in focus, often in stark contrast to the realities and requirements surrounding the transition people are required to make in an environment in which they perceive change that is imposed upon them.

The populist logical approach just doesn’t address the need to shift an individual’s belief before you can expect a shift in action (behaviour), or the fact the imposition of anything ‘new’ is a primary fear trigger, often resulting in the dreaded ‘resistance to change’ at a cultural level (group think/herd behaviour).

Isn’t it time we stopped driving our companies and people as if they are cars and openly acknowledged the biggest change follows a change in the person behind the wheel?

With significant advances in neuroscience and psychology, it’s now possible to explain every aspect of Locke’s, Shein’s, and Frankel’s observations with science – to move the conversation away from generalisations that only a few come to understand, into hard and fast action for reasons that not only make sense, but translate into top line and bottom line benefit.

Let’s raise the bar and replace the assumption that we can understand things, but everyone else needs it dumbed down; we don’t need issues surrounding ‘transition’ dumbed down…we just need to include them in the conversation.

For too long we’ve been dealing with Process, Procedure, Policy, Strategy (Hoshin), Structure, and Systems as if they are detached from the people expected to adjust to their presence.

It’s always been about people and that means the starting point has to be Brain, Mind, Change, and Culture before we can do a better job of introducing strategic deployment models and tools and techniques.

Lets stop defending the past and move into the future with the language the present provides us.


Paul AinsworthPaul AinsworthJuly 17, 2019
artificial-4082314_1280-1280x825.jpg

3min405

Employees in UK businesses are optimistic about the future impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on their jobs according to a nationwide study.

The research was carried out by global leader in omnichannel CX and contact centre solutions Genesys, official sponsor of the 2019 UK Customer Experience Awards.

It found nearly two-thirds of employees value new technological tools such as AI in the workplace. In fact, 64 percent of UK employees say it makes them more effective and allows them to focus on other tasks.

The findings reveal an overwhelmingly positive outlook from employees, despite the negative headlines anticipating such technologies would replace humans in the workplace. More than two-thirds of employees say they don’t feel threatened by technology at work. They don’t expect the technology to become a threat anytime soon either, given that 59 percent don’t believe AI or bots will take their jobs within the next ten years.

In fact, employees see AI as pivotal to business success with more than a fifth saying they believe AI or bots will be crucial to their companies ability to stay competitive in the future. While the survey shows that people are more excited about AI technology than fearful, it also found that in the long-term they want assurances from their employers in the form of training. The research showed an overwhelming majority (86 percent) of employees expect their employers to provide training that helps them prepare for an AI-enabled workplace.

Meanwhile, a fifth of employees say they are already working with AI, while just 16 percent report a negative experience of new technological tools in the workplace.

Other findings include 64 percent of employees believing there should be a requirement that companies maintain a minimum percentage of human employees versus AI-powered robots and machinery, and 41 percent of millennials saying they spend 50 percent or more of their time interacting with machines and computers rather than humans.

Steve Leeson, Vice President for UK and Ireland for Genesys, said: “It’s encouraging that the UK’s workers recognise the potential new technologies such as AI have to make their jobs more fulfilling and the value it can bring to businesses.

Some jobs will evolve as human work combines with the capabilities of AI. It’s increasingly important for companies to assess the need for training programs to help employees further skills like creativity, leadership and empathy, which AI just can’t replace.

“Businesses that adopt a blended approach to artificial intelligence, where AI-technologies work in unison with employees, will get the best out of their technology investment and their skilled workforce.”

 

 

 

 

 


Kay HutchinsonKay HutchinsonJuly 15, 2019
yoga-3053488_1280-1280x853.jpg

7min361

Client and commercial focus have always been important with consistent high quality seen as a key brand value.

When I was Director of Client Services working in TV, our clients were other broadcasters. We provided all the elements that make each channel appear seamless to the viewer. Performance levels were exacting and measured in a few seconds of outages/errors against a full year’s output (8,760 hrs). Over the years, I have managed large teams under pressure as well as working one-to-one with ‘on-air’ talent and small creative teams.

In my early career I believed success required constant effort; in fact I believed the more effort I put in, the better would be the results. However, I discovered there’s a limit and, over the years, I have realised how important it is to take a step back and allow some space to put the many and complex business issues into some perspective. Doing this has benefits for you as a person, as well as for your clients and customers. 

Overly focusing on tasks and performance levels can sometimes spill over into the nervous system and lead to exhaustion. I found that some therapies you’d normally associate with your private life have enormous benefits in the work context too. I believe, in today’s frenetic world, it’s important to look after yourself; to help you stay the course, continue to make good decisions, and ultimately be successful. But you can only do this if you’re in a balanced state of mind and your physical system is healthy and functioning well.

Apart from nourishing your body by eating well (put down that doughnut) and exercising regularly, do something that keeps your mind healthy too.  Here are a few suggestions.

Silent meditation

I tried silent meditation – strictly no talking for ten days over Christmas one year – and it was a full-on calming experience, if a little extreme. The benefits of silence are significant, and you can do it yourself any time. No unnecessary expense or fancy kit, just a few minutes in a quiet space.

Silence is golden: Quiet meditation can work wonders for your mind

Switch everything off. Relax in a comfortable position and simply focus on yourself. Close your eyes, breathe slowly. Become aware of the sensation of air moving in and out, expanding your ribs and gently filling your lungs.  If your mind drifts off, gently bring it back to your breathing. Continue for 5-10 minutes until you feel fully relaxed.

Make it part of your daily routine. You should find it easier to be more objective in tricky situations and to consider other points of view, especially those of your customers.

Acupuncture or massage

If you prefer a more direct approach, try acupuncture or massage. They both help regularise the energy flow around the body. If you tell a good therapist exactly what you’re looking for (releasing tension, improving performance, relaxing the mind), they should be able to focus their efforts in exactly the right places to help. Ask your GP to help find a qualified practitioner or look up the AACP (aacp.org.uk) or CNHC (cnhc.org.uk).

Hypnosis

If you’re stuck in a cycle of constantly working late, sleeping badly, or having anxiety attacks, perhaps it’s time to try something more regular. A course of hypnotherapy can fundamentally change your habits as it works with the subconscious mind to help disrupt any repeating cycles of negative behaviour.

If you want to do this in private and keep costs down, then I’d suggest you listen to any of the gurus of positive thinking. It’s not hypnotherapy, but it can help you change your behaviour through positively affirming a new approach. Try Tony Robbins or Louise Hay – different styles and approaches, but equally effective.

Your colleagues should notice the difference…and I expect your customers will too.

My Life in 37 Therapies by Kay Hutchison is out 4 July 2019 and is priced at £9.99


Paul AinsworthPaul AinsworthJuly 11, 2019
controller-1587567_1280-1280x1280.png

4min617

With almost one-in-two UK workplaces having introduced gamified rewards for staff, new research has revealed which of this kind of incentive has the biggest impact on productivity.

A survey of 1,219 UK workers, carried out by workplace incentives and rewards provider One4all Rewards, has been published in The Gamification Report. It surveyed employees from different age groups, genders, and industries, revealing which type of gamified rewards systems would motivate them the most or for the longest period of time.

Virtually one-in-two (49 percent) workers were most likely to cite surprise or unexpected rewards as being the biggest motivator. However, the research shows just 36 percent of businesses are utilising this type of gamified reward.

Fixed action reward came in second place (39 percent), with workers stating they would be motivated to work harder if their employer offered them, while random rewards in return for completing a certain task or action would work for a third (29 percent).

Prize pacing style rewards – such as rewards that are given in one small piece at a time, for example a number of small rewards given at a staggered rate – were motivating for 27 percent. Meanwhile, 23 percent of UK workers stated they would work harder or for longer to unlock social treasure style rewards, which are awarded by peers.

The majority (42 percent) of businesses offering gamified rewards systems are relying on fixed action rewards – which award a specific prize for a specific action, such as a named bonus or prize for hitting a set target.

Michael Dawson, Managing Director of One4all, said: “It’s fantastic that almost half of UK businesses have already adopted a gamified reward and bonus system for their staff – but the research shows that some could be using them to greater impact employee productivity.

“Fixed action rewards and bonuses are often the number one style of gamified rewards offered amongst UK businesses – and it’s easy to see why, as the idea of giving a set bonus for hitting a specific target is something that has been around in the workforce for a long time – but it’s definitely worth bosses considering that it’s actually surprise rewards which will have the biggest impact on productivity and effort.

“Given that these types of rewards truly embody the spirit of gamified rewards – which recognise and praise good behaviour, to encourage workers to repeat this in the hope of receiving another reward – this makes sense.”

 


Paul AinsworthPaul AinsworthJuly 11, 2019
bar-621033_1280-1280x850.jpg

9min718

From poor work/life balance and long working hours to a lack of progression and difficult interviews, new research reveals what it’s really like to be employed by some of the biggest organisations in both the UK and US.

Based on LinkedIn’s annual report of the most sought-after companies to work at in the UK, Power House Truths curates and dissects over 210,000 employee reviews to see where each company really ranks across a number of metrics, including senior management rating, interview difficulty and average salary.

The 2019 LinkedIn Top Companies report discloses where jobseekers want to work, based on the four main pillars of interaction on the platform: interest in the company, engagement with the company’s employees, job demand, and employee retention.

The research shows that despite being the most desirable workplace in the UK and the third most popular in the US, Amazon sits tenth in the rankings. Analysis of the organisation’s 32,000 employee reviews reveals a poor work/life balance, low senior management rating, and smaller salaries when comparing them to the US coveted companies.

The US companies do far better in the overall rank in comparison to UK organisations, holding an average rank position of 5.9 compared to the UK’s 9.2. This may be due to the discrepancy in average salary between major organisations, with UK-based BP paying its employees a staggering £47,700 less than Apple – despite making £29 million more in revenue.

Although Google is the most desirable workplace in the US according to LinkedIn, analysis of its 11,000 employee reviews actually places it in fourth position. Compared to other notable organisations featured on the rank, the tech company has the most difficult interview process, but offers a high average salary and good benefits.

The research also includes an extensive list of the advantages and disadvantages of the businesses included. For example, Google’s Free Food Everyday scheme for its 57,000 employees has been upvoted by 790 people leaving reviews. However, people who work their say it can be hard to maintain a healthy work/ life balance at the company, and they feel because the company is so large, “you don’t always get a lot of responsibility”.

Uber is praised for its flexible working hours by its drivers, but over 500 employees say drunk riders and the cost of car repairs are a huge downside to working for the organisation.

Top company benefits for those working at supermarket giant Sainsbury’s include good sick pay, critical illness cover, and a 10 percent employee discount card. Downsides to working for Sainsbury’s include finding that team leaders are often contradictory and its long working hours.

Pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline offers one of the most favourable work/life balances, as well as its culture and values rating, with employees praising the company’s work environment and career opportunities. However, the company could improve its senior management rating, decision-making process and average salary.

According to recruitment partner Karen Dykes, the benefits companies choose to advertise play a key role in how quickly they accumulate staff and grow. She said: “With talent shortages reported in many sectors, top candidates are looking beyond basic salary offerings to attract them to certain roles.

“Benefits packages are most certainly in the spotlight, with a particular focus on those that support work/life balance. These include generous holiday entitlement, healthcare advantages and flexible working. If a skilled candidate has multiple interview offers, benefits packages will come into play. They may be time poor in terms of interview preparation, so will narrow the field by evaluating the overall package.”

 


Alf RehnAlf RehnJuly 10, 2019
man-3230661_1280-1280x854.jpg

6min691

The following article has been written for CXM by bestselling author and Professor of Innovation, Design and Management at the University of Southern Denmark, Alf Rehn

 

We might call this the tragedy of niceness…

So used are we to thinking of business as a cold, hard space, bereft of emotions and ruled by calculated rationality, that even when issues more aligned with caring and compassion are discussed, they are often presented as marginal concerns.

Consider, for instance, the issue of diversity. A plethora of studies has shown that diversity is a key business driver. Organisations which rate high in diversity, particularly when this includes top management, outperform less diverse companies when it comes to things such as performance and profitability, and in particular when it comes to innovation.

A recent study from the Boston Consulting Group showed that companies with more diverse leadership teams reported almost double the innovation revenues than companies with below-average diversity scores. In today’s highly competitive environment, such figures can literally be the difference between life or death for a company.

That said, diversity is still often discussed as a ‘nice to have’ for an organisation, rather than something of critical and strategic importance. I’ve sometimes referred to this as “the aestheticisation of diversity”, by which I mean that diversity is looked to more for its superficial benefits and less for the manner in which it responds to core business requirements. Coupled with the tendency to frame diversity as an ethical and moral issue, this ends up presenting diversity as a fundamentally nice thing – and this is a problem.

Damaging: Alf Rehn highlights ‘the aestheticisation of diversity’ as a problem for firms

As long as issues such as diversity – and we could easily replace this word with e.g. care, compassion, or civility – are presented as issues that make ethical or aesthetic sense, they will fail to become adopted as core logics in an organisation.

This is not only problematic from the perspective of diversity itself, it actively damages companies. We thus need to push far harder for the point that diversity is done for logical reasons, fully in line with the profit motive companies tend to operate under, if only to ensure that these principles are taken seriously.

In my research into innovation, this has played out in the starkest ways possible. Studies have consistently and for a very long time shown that team and company diversity are some of the most critical deciding factors for creativity and innovation success there are. Further, I have myself seen how organisations that embrace cultural values such as respect and compassion do considerably better when it comes to idea generation and development than organisations that are lacking in these dimensions.

Still, whenever talk turns to the way in which diversity and compassion might be developed in an organisations, CEOs and key executives often treat these as marginal issues. Rather than seeing them as strategic engagements, they are shunted off to HR, or given short shrift by at best being discussed as a possible theme for a workshop some times in the future.

This needs to change, as in an increasingly competitive environment, companies simply cannot afford to lose the cognitive surplus that lies in having diverse and compassionate organisations. Whilst it might sound troubling to some, diversity isn’t only nice, nor is compassion just pleasant. Both deliver where it counts, in creativity, in profit margins, in improved customer relationships.

Squandering such riches isn’t just about being a boor, but about being an incompetent executive. So let the aestheticisation of diversity and compassion take second place to what truly matters – the cold, hard reality that diversity and compassion drives results, generates innovations, and makes companies better. That they’re nice is a lovely added bonus.


Paul AinsworthPaul AinsworthJuly 10, 2019
career-3478983_1280-1280x743.jpg

4min394

New research has shone a light on a potential recruitment crisis which could lead to “failure” for firms.

A study published by recruitment-tech firm, Worksome found that up to a third of new employees are not passing their six-month probationary reviews, while only eight percent of businesses feel new hires have all the skills needed for the job, costing companies thousands of pounds and creating long-lasting negative effects.

The research found that, on average, businesses spend nearly £6459 a year on recruitment and hiring. If a candidate doesn’t work out, not only are these fees lost, but the salary for the probationary period is also wasted. With the average advertised UK salary being £35k, this equates to potentially £17k lost over a six month probation period.

In total, that means that one in every three new hires could be wasting £23k for a business.

The research also revealed that over a quarter of businesses prioritise cost over quality when it comes to recruitment, but 21 percent say they later come to regret that decision. Meanwhile, 32 percent of business owners say recruiters are too pushy, and rush them to make a decision.

Hiring hindrance: Only six percent of business believe that recruiters have access to the best talent.

According to Mathias Linnemann, co-founder of Worksome, there are many reasons why a business may turn to a recruitment consultant.

“The prospect of saving time can be a major lure especially in a world where it’s essential to fill positions quickly, and promise to deliver a quality of candidate that businesses are otherwise unable to access,” he said.

“For business leaders lacking confidence in recruitment, the promise of quickly supplied talent is enough to make the recruiter’s commission fees seem worth it.

“However, our research demonstrates that the traditional recruiter method of securing talent is simply no longer working. Businesses are clearly feeling that there is lack of knowledge in their business which – in a fast moving world where getting the right skills, at the right times – could be the difference between success and failure.”

Sharing his thoughts on how employers and recruiters can ensure that they don’t fall foul of the failings in the recruitment process, he added: “With a third of candidates not making it past their six-month probationary period, we can see that something is broken in the recruitment and hiring process.

“While our research suggests pain-points relating to the use of recruitment consultants, there is no one single factor to blame. For many businesses, recruitment consultants offer a vital service and so shouldn’t be dismissed, or all tarred with the same brush. If hiring managers can feel more confident about candidates and recruits before they walk through the door, they can take back a level of control and feel more empowered to make the right decisions.”


Paul AinsworthPaul AinsworthJuly 9, 2019
city-building-night-view-night-88514-1280x896.jpg

2min496

Plans by Deutsche Bank to “restart” its operation have led to the first cull of employees in London, along with a loss of staff in New York and Tokyo.

The German investment giant is undergoing a radical reorganisation to “become more profitable, improve shareholder returns, and drive long-term growth”. However, the changes are coming at a cost of 18,000 jobs, with staff learning of redundancies on Monday, prompting some to not turn up to the London office at all after being told their passes would no longer work.

Full details of the job cuts have yet to be revealed, but around 800 staff work for the bank’s share treading operations in London, which are shutting down. The firm says the downsizing of its investment bank is occurring as it aims to cut total costs by a quarter by 2022.

Deutsche Bank has struggled since the financial crisis of 2008, and now hopes to focus on corporate money management as it sheds its equities and trading operation. Despite positive claims on the firm’s future from spokespeople, a significant number of staff are now facing an uncertain future in the wake of the first wave of lay-offs.

In an email circulated to staff, Deutsche Bank CEO Christian Sewing stated what was happening was “nothing less than a fundamental transformation of our bank”.

He went on: “I am very much aware that in rebuilding our bank, we are making deep cuts. I personally greatly regret the impact this will have on some of you. In the long-term interests of our bank, however, we have no choice other than to approach this transformation decisively. Only then can we build on our long-standing history and make Deutsche Bank a leading bank once again.”

 

 

 




Inform. Inspire. Include.
A free way to improve your business.

Customer Experience Magazine is the online magazine packed full of industry news, blogs, features, reports, case studies, video bites and international stories all focusing on customer experience.


CONTACT US

CALL US ANYTIME



Contact Information

For article submissions:
Editor
Paul Ainsworth
editorial@cxm.co.uk

For general inquiries, advertising and partnership information:
advertising@cxm.co.uk
Tel: 0207 1932 428

For Masterclass enquiries:
antonija@cxm.co.uk
Tel: 0207 1937 483

Awards International ltd
Acacia Farm, Lower Road,
Royston, Herts, SG8 0EE
Company number: 6707388

JOBS IN CUSTOMER SUPPORT

Find a job in customer support with Jobsora


Newsletter