Co Creating the Customer Journey w the Client

1
CO-CREATING
C U S T O M E R
RELATIONSHIPSThoughts, Explorations & Concepts for Customer
Driven Marketing & Service Innovation
by Wim Rampen

2
I’ve been thinking about writing a book
several times. And this time I thought I’d
do something about it. As it seemed
sensible I started reading through the past
three years of blog-posts that I’ve written.
Having done so I decided I might as well
share the ones I like best with you in a
digital booklet.
This booklet has four ‘Chapters’.
The first chapter discusses Value. You can
read all about adding value, offering value, value
chains, value netwroks and even creating value.
It can well be one of the most used words in
business publications, but only very few seem
to be worried about what it means, and how
value can be a used on a conceptual level as to
make it framework one can use in a business
environnment. Since ‘Value’ is also used a lot in
my blogposts, I thought I’d share with you how
I think about the concept in the first Chapter.
Chapter two, a short one, contains two posts
on The Net Promoter Score (NPS). Two light
reads to express my love/hate affair with
metrics in general and NPS in specific.
Chapter three is where the meat is. This is
about Social CRM and how I think about
Customer Relationship-building in the age of
Service and Co-Creation. If you’re looking for
my persepective on technological
developments you will be dissappointed as I
discuss Social CRM on a conceptual and
company strategy level.
The last chapter (four) contains two posts in
which I bring together my thinking from the past
two years. The first one is on Service, the
second one on Marketing. Both are quite long
and have received lots of compliments,
retweets, referrals and comments. They too
have been the basis for several presentations
and key-notes that I have conducted over the
past year or so.
I consider this booklet my personal resource, a
well of inspiration for writing my book and an
important way to to collect feedback from you
as to whether the idea of writing a book makes
any sense ;)
Enjoy reading & please let me know what you
think at http://wimrampen.com
Introduction
By Wim Rampen

3
People who know me through my writing,
know that I’m very interested in
understanding ‘value’. Make no mistake:
I’m not talking ‘valueS’. That’s the field of
thinkers like Umair Haque and many
others following his footsteps. Even
Michael Porter, the value chain guru, has
come entered the debate with a plea for
Shared Value(s).
No, I’m talking about the value Customers
derive from the products and services we, the
companies, provide. And if you know me really
well, you know I don’t think in terms of
‘extracting, getting or deriving value from’. I
think in terms of value as being co-created
between Customers, firms and potentially many
other participants. More about that later in this
booklet.
One of the most important notions about value,
to me, is that it can only be determined by its
beneficiary. I once used the example of
watching a football game with friends in a bar.
Although, from an external perspective
everyone had exactly the same experience, we
all know that everyone will tell a different story
the following morning.
And that is the case with all products and
services we consume (or better: experience):
we all experience in a different way. Hence,
value is a very personal state of mind, a
perception of what is expected or has been
created.
This Chapter contains three posts, amongst the
most popular of my blog over the past years.
Thank in advance for reading.
“Value can only be
determined by its
beneficiary”
Steve Vargo and Robert Lusch - A Service Dominant Logic
Chapter I. Value Defined...
or not actually...
By Wim Rampen

4
Over the past years most companies have
recognized the contact center or customer
services center as an important touch-
point between the company and its
Customers.
[...] I very much welcome the interest of
Marketing (and Sales) for the call center
environment as much as I do the attention for
improvement of the Customer Experience.
The main strategy of call centers has been to
develop itself from a cost to a value center.
From a terminology perspective this works for
me, but the practice, in my opinion, is mostly
focused on single value creation or value
extraction. Let me explain my thoughts:
The main elements of the cost to value-center
strategy have been focusing around generating
additional sales, through up- and/or cross-
selling. [...] Some pro-active companies are
aiming to improve the customer experience
with things like welcome calls or any other form
of courtesy calls (generating another sales-
opportunity).
I'm a firm believer in the great opportunities for
value creation there are on the customer
services touch-point. I also see that, in lots of
cases, after a promising first starting year,
companies forget that value-creation is not only
about extracting as much value possible out of
the Customer into the company. Hence
companies start increasing the sales-targets
and more importantly, they start increasing the
"sales-per-hour" target, which is just another
productivity metric not aimed at customer value
creation. Which leads me to the following
statement:
"Deployment of a Value Center strategy will only
have a chance to meet the desired result if one
can leave behind Cost Center methodologies
and metrics"
Becoming a Value Center is not about choosing
to upsell or cross-sell when you want it.
Becoming a Value Center is also not something
one can decide to be by itself. Let the
Customer be the judge of how much value is
created through the Customer Services
Experience, let the customer decide if your Call
Center is a Value Center!
Call Centers are an important touch-point in the
Customer Experience. It is also not the only
point a Customer will touch in its lifetime. The
design , delivery and decision making aspects
within the Call Center change if a company
thinks and manages the contacts as part of a
lifetime of Customer interactions. [...]
Thus, to conclude, I believe the best way to go
is not with a cost-centered, not with a profit-
centered and not with a flawed value-centered
approach. The best approach to Customer
Services Call Centers is the Customer-centered
approach.
To Be A Value (Call) Center is Not Your Choice
By Wim Rampen
Deployment of a Value
Center strategy will only
have a chance to meet the
desired result if one can
leave behind Cost Center
methodologies and metrics

5
One of the fundamental ﬂaws in thinking
about value is based on the persistent
logic that value is something you add, or
provide. I’ll try to explain why and how you
should think about value creation instead.
Value is not derived from your product, but
created with your product
It’s persistence is shown e.g. in the way we
think about value chains. It is vested thoroughly
in our minds that each step in the production
and delivery of goods or services is about
adding value, whilst at best it is about adding
knowledge, features or capabilities. None of
these elements are creating value for the
Customer though before they are consumed or
used.
As a consequence today’s marketers continue
to focus on explaining to (potential) Customers
what value they are providing or adding. Firms
seem not to understand that the other side of
the table is not deriving value FROM the
product. The other side is trying to get a job
done and your product or service is a means to
that end, thus they are creating value WITH the
product. And – this is really important – they
can’t do that job without themselves.. Indeed,
themselves:
Customers can only create value for
themselves WITH themselves..
If it weren’t for yourself, how would you be able
to make a phone call? How would you be able
to make dinner? How would you be able to
enjoy it with your friends? How would you be
able to use your satellite TV? How would you,
well …. basically get anything done? I think you
get my drift here. And although it sounds
incredibly logical, this is not the logic most
companies use when designing experiences or
targeting new Customers.
Ignoring the Customer’s role
Most companies (their marketing departments
in particular) are stuck in telling Customers what
value for their money they get, based on the
ﬂawed thinking that the Customer derives value
from the product itself. Yet, they are completely
ignoring the Customer’s role in the process of
value creation.
Value is Always Co-Created
By Wim Rampen
"A brand doesn't know what it is unless it knows
what its customer is. That's why smart
organizations focus on strengthening
relationships with actual customers, and not on
the independent creation of content and
attention."
Tom Asacker - A Clear Eye

6
When they should be thinking how to further
enable the Customer’s value creating
capabilities, they are thinking of how to capture
value from the Customer. Which in essence
they ask in return prior to the value being
created. (yes, most purchases are actually pre-
payments). Why?
Because value only comes to life when
Customers are using the product or
service.
Once you understand that the Customer has an
important, even decisive, role in the process of
value creation, and that value is only created in
use, it is not a quantum leap to the next stage:
asking yourself what Customers need to do, in
order to be able to create the value they are
after. Asking yourself: What do they need to
know, understand, be able to? (and I’m not
even touching upon the contextual and
emotional side of value creation here). Or taken
from the opposite angle: what is hindering
them? what don’t they have? what don’t they
understand? what can’t they do? and how
come?
Many in the area of marketing, Customer
experience or even Service design, try to
answer similar questions, yes. But dominantly in
the context of selling goods or services (how
can we make buying easier?). Too few ask
themselves these questions in relation to the
Customer’s experience when consuming the
goods or services.
What could be, if you would truly
understand?
Imagine if you would understand what
“resources” Customers bring to the table to
create value, beyond the product or service you
provide? How powerful would that
understanding be? What if you would
understand that better than your Customer’s
alternative suppliers? What would happen if you
could support your Customers creating value in
a more easy, better or quicker way, not just
make them buy in a more easy, better or
quicker way?
Would that not provide you with the competitive
advantage you want? Would that not create the
advocates you want? Would that not allow you
to capture higher margins over a longer
Customer lifetime?
I think so..
Value is Always Co-Created
Continued...
By Wim Rampen
Most companies (their marketing departments in
particular) are stuck in telling Customers what
value for their money they get, based on the
ﬂawed thinking that the Customer derives value
from the product itself. Yet, they are ignoring the
Customer’s role in the process of value creation.

7
I'm a big fan of Business Model Generation
and the Business Model Canvas. I find it
rather useful in many situations to explain
the essence of CRM Strategy, Customer
Experience and the importance of the
other building blocks to the blocks in the
upper-right part of the Business Model
Canvas.
I also find it not to provide the depth sometimes
needed to explain how Company's resources
and capabilities need to be aligned with
Customer's resources and the Customer's
journey to result in a Customer's experience
that creates value for both companies and
Customers.. co-creates as one should say.
I played around with the canvas and came up
with my own Value Co-Creation Canvas.. It's far
from finished or perfect, but I believe it's good
enough to present to you and ask you for
feedback. I think it should be a self-explanatory
canvas in the end, but am sure it isn't yet. So
please ask all questions you might have. It will
help me improve it.
Value Co-Creation Canvas
By Wim Rampen

8
When I started with my blog, over 3 years
ago now, I was mostly concerned with
metrics and measurement frameworks. I
even tried to rally up an international
community of highly experienced people in
the ﬁeld of Customer Experience
Management and measurement to co-
create a new measurement framework to
capture value co-creation.
What I didn’t know then is a) building a
community is tough work because hardly
anyone acts by himself completely b) it is
impossible if the concept of value co-creation is
not widely understood. And thus the initiative
died.
But that never stopped me from writing and
thinking about it, resulting in the best read post
on my blog to-date. And it continues to be read
very well almost every week. It never
dissappears from the top 5 best read post.
On the next pages you will ﬁnd two posts on
NPS. Both resulted in heavy pro/con NPS
debates. To-date I have mixed feelings about
the concept. One thing is for sure: I’ll never buy
into NPS being the one number you need to
grow, like Reichheld c.s. suggested.
But please, judge for yourself, if you haven’t
already.
THE QUESTION
How likely is it that you would recommend [your company] to a friend or
colleague?
HOW IT’S MEASURED
Chapter II. Metrics, metrics, metrics..
and how I love/hate NPS
By Wim Rampen

9
Net Promoter Score, like Customer
Satisfaction, is not a killer metric.
NPS has been presented as ‘The One Number
You Need to Grow’. [...] There has been, and
still is, a fierce discussion on the validity of NPS
with regard to its [...] predictive capabilities. One
of the better publications, from my point of
view, is this one from MIT Sloan (PDF). For a
good overview of pro's and con's also take a
look here.
Personally I do not take for granted any metric,
let alone a metric like NPS that has been
marketed like it is the silver bullet for
businesses. The Customer Experience is not
something one can take lightly nor are
Customers. They are both way more complex
than can be captured through measurement of
one question (and an open feedback-question)
that aims only to capture how many Customers
would be willing to promote your company or
product.
Maybe provoked by the fierce way NPS
advocates approach the discussion and defend
their positions, I developed an aversion to the
metric. I still believe that a more profound
measurement framework that focuses on
measuring Customer (desired) Outcomes and
Value Co-creation, and not Customer
semantics, is a more powerful toolbox.
Zappos.com and a Customer Experience
that makes the difference
Nevertheless I also have to acknowledge that
there are some great examples of companies
that are successful and that have great Net
Promoter Scores.[...] One example of the
application of NPS I found has caught my
attention: Zappos. Zappos is known for its
great customer centric culture, wowing
customer service and sustainable growth.
Zappos.com is maybe The Brand Icon of how it
should be done. This video (featuring
Zappos.com CEO Tony Hsieh) provides some
insight in how they do it.
It is not measuring NPS that relates to the
success, it is the other way around
The success of a clearly defined, and well
executed strategy aimed at increasing positive
Word of Mouth through "wowing" Customer
Experiences, can be measured through NPS.
The Key-differentiator is not the measurement,
it is the strategy and the alignment of
companies resources, culture and true
understanding of the Customer Experiences
that matter, which result in high NPS scores.
Let me try and explain through a quote from
Graham Hill: There is absolutely NO POINT in
measuring something if doing so doesn't allow
you to change the system through
management action. These are often different
measures to those typically measured by
management.
As the video shows, Zappos.com understands
their Customers and the Outcomes they desire.
Zappos.com knows how to leverage this
knowledge and understanding. They are
measuring far more elements of the Customer
Experience than NPS. Net Promoter Score for
Zappos.com is an outcome of management
action. I even think they are able to predict their
next months Net Promoter Score because they
know what Experiences their Customers had.
Did NPS do that for them? I doubt it. It is their
focused and well executed strategy in
combination with a balanced measurement
framework.
NPS & The Customer Experience
By Wim Rampen

10
I know a lot has been said about Net
Promoter Score (NPS), and I'm not in this
world to judge anyone who's working with
it, or developing it into a Net Promoter
System.
I do like to share my experiences with it
though, hoping to attract other people who'd
like to share theirs, so we can all get a better
understanding of what drives Customer loyalty
and how to manage for it. Unfortunately the
Net Promoter Score is not working for me right
now. And here's why
In my role at Delta Lloyd Groep I have the
pleasure to work together with Zanna van der
Aa, who is working in my team as Program
manager of the Customer Experience Program
we've launched this year. Zanna recently
received her PhD based on her research on
the role of the customer contact center in
relationship marketing. In short: she pretty
much knows her stuff and she's as curious as
I am to really understand what drives
Customer Loyalty ;)
How we measure
As part of the program we are measuring
Customer Satisfaction, Net Promoter Score
and Customer Effort Score. The first two we
are both measuring on the level of interactions
(e.g. after a service call, or claiming damages)
and the level of our annual Customer
Satisfaction survey on a large proportion of our
Customer base (including those not in
interaction/transaction with us over the past
year). Customer Effort Score we are only
measuring on the level of interactions. Apart
from these standard questions, we are asking
more questions in different forms, including an
open answer box to obtain qualitative
Sorry NPS, I’m not buying it
By Wim Rampen
A comment by Rags Srinivasan to this
post provides some good additional
insights:
You make very valid points based only on
experience but also looking at it from
broader context.
Since you already made some of the key
points on customer satisfaction metric and
how NPS is all over the place, I will try to
make other points.
1. By the very definition of the metric,
when you measure it for the first time for
any business you are highly likely to find
negative value. Take a case where
respondents all answer randomly and
avoid rating 0 or 10. The NPS score for
this business is going to be -55
(whether it is uniformly or normally
distributed may change this, but still a
low negative number). On the other
hand a simple average of the rating (like
customer sat) will show it is 5. A
negative number creates a sense of
really bad situation and helps to sell
add-on services to improve this score.
2. What is materially different between a 10
point scale used by ACSI and this 11
point scale? Why 0 to 6 are detractors
when 5 is labeled on NPS survey
question as neither likely nor unlikely.
3. If we treat 7 and 8 as Passives, what
about those who did not even bother to
respond to the survey? By its own logic
this scale should treat all non-

11
feedback as well. Response rates are quite high
on the transactional surveys, and very
satisfactory on the annual one.
What we see
Customer Satisfaction ratings are quite stable
and have been increasing steadily over the past
years. The scores are also very similar throughout
both methods. We seem to have a good
understanding on what needle we need to move
to get improvement on Customer Satisfaction.
How different is this with Net Promoter Score.
The score itself is all over the place. It seems to
change from quarter to quarter going up and
down without any reason (and we have been
looking for them).
I'm 'bothered'
A recent event really makes me doubt the Net
Promoter Score question/methodology: Our own
measurement showed a score, whilst a survey
held by the same research ﬁrm on exactly the
same sample, as part of an industry benchmark
as little as two months later, produced a
difference of 20 points in the score. And
Customer Satisfaction scores in both surveys
showed the exact same result. On top of this
there are even bigger differences between the
score in our own measurements and other so-
called 'industry benchmarks'. Since for the latter
we don't know the exact way the questions are
asked and in what order, we could not really be
bothered. But with current 'evidence' that's
exactly what we are..
Oh.. and the judge is still out on Customer Effort
Score (CES), but so far we don't see the higher
relationship with Customer loyalty, as promised..
So, what do you think? Back to Customer
Satisfaction as the primary metric?
Sorry NPS, I’m not buying it
Continued...
By Wim Rampen
respondents as Passives. It cannot
switch scales for its own
convenience.
4. When you ask respondents a rating
question, regardless of whether it it
about satisfaction or
recommendation, the answers are
not going to be that different. It is an
interval scale with continuous data.
But in order to brand and monetize it
they invented this complex Net math
that converts customer level data into
a useless company level net metric.
5. Segmentation? The method and
metric absolutely fail to ask any
question about segmentation and do
not care how this metric differs
across segment. What is the use of
aggregate metric that ignores
segmentation?
In essence we have an arbitrary irrelevant
metric that has captured the minds of
some
You can ﬁnd some excellent insights
from Rags on his blog at
http://iterativepath.wordpress.com

12
Ever since I ‘set foot’ on Twitter I was
introduced to the concept of Social CRM.
I’ve had some amazing talks, discussions
and blog-exchanges and with many smart
and leading people in the world of CRM
and Social Media, trying to figure out what
Social CRM could be(come). If you select
the category Social CRM on my blog you
will find many articles about the concept
and its development over time.
My musings on Social CRM are, volumewise,
probably worthy of a book, but I’m pretty sure
Paul Greenberg is beating me to it ;) And I can’t
even begin to walk in his shadow.
Paul Greenberg is one of the very few people I
know that are really open minded and truly
enjoy helping and connecting people. I’m not
only glad I can count Paul Greemberg as a
friend, I’m really grateful he introduced me to
his world by inviting me to the world’s first
Social CRM Strategy for Business Seminar in
Washington DC, early 2010.
Ever since we have been in contact irregularly,
but I know I can reach out to him when I need
his help, his point of view or his support. Thank
you Paul!
And, that also goes for the bunch of people we
refer to as the “Social CRM Accidental
Community”: Brian Vellmure, Mark Tamis,
Mitch Lieberman, Prem Kumar, Esteban
Kolsky, Mike Boysen, Michael Krigsman,
Paul Sweeney and Laurence Buchanan. All
must follows.
If you’re interested in Social CRM please read
some of my posts on the next pages. Before
you do, it does make sense to read Paul
Greenberg’s seminal post: “It’s time to put a
stake in the ground”.
Enjoy, and son’t hesitate to contact me through
my blog, if you have any questions or views to
share.
Chapter III. Social CRM
Definitions, Concepts, Strategy & More
By Wim Rampen
Yeah, though Po the Kung Fu Panda became the Dragon
Warrior by understanding that theres no secret ingredient in
his father's secret ingredient soup as also theres no secret
in the dragon scroll, he did have a great training in making
soup as well as kung fu. ;)
Methods, tools, techniques are necessary but insufficient
condition for success
Prem Kumar - Social CRM Evangalist

13
It has been a while since Paul Greenberg
put the stake in the ground by writing
down the definition of Social CRM. For
further reading purposes I will repeat it
here:
“SCRM is a philosophy & a business
strategy, supported by a technology
platform, business rules, workflow,
processes & social characteristics,
designed to engage the customer in a
collaborative conversation in order to
provide mutually beneficial value in a
trusted & transparent business
environment. It’s the company’s response
to the customer’s ownership of the
conversation.”
On top of the definition I think there is a more
specified set of elements needed to define a
Social CRM strategic framework statement. A
statement that can provide some direction how
to design processes, services and experiences
in line with the SCRM philosophy and the latest
thinking on Customer Centricity and CRM.
Three Strategic questions: Who? - What? -
How?
I think of strategy in three simple questions:
Who are your Customers? What are their
needs? How will those needs be met?
Answering these questions will provide you with
a rough strategic statement that enables you to
communicate both internally and externally on
what your Company is all about. At the end of
this post I will provide you with my view on the
Strategic Framework Statement for Social
CRM.
Before I do I will take you through some steps I
think are important for understanding the
framework-statement I propose. First of all we
need to understand how Social CRM changes
the way we answer those 3 questions?
What has changed through Social CRM
that is significantly different from the pre-
scrm era?
Paul Greenberg makes a statement in his
“staking”-post that relates to this last question,
which I totally agree with:
“What this means is that SCRM is an extension
of CRM, not a replacement for CRM. Its a
dramatic change in what it adds to the features,
functions and characteristics of CRM but it is
still based on the time honored principle that a
business needs its customers and prefers them
profitable and that same business needs to run
itself effectively too.”
But there is a change! Another quote from Paul
Greenberg:
“The lesson for business, in terms of Social
CRM is that we are now at a point that the
customers’ expectations are so great and their
demands so empowered that our SCRM
business strategy needs to be built around
collaboration and customer engagement, not
traditional operational customer management.”
This is the fundamental change, that has been
discussed and is still being discussed all over
the (virtual) globe.
On top of this Graham Hill said the following in
a comment to Paul Greenberg’s post:
“Social CRM [...] extends CRM from being
something predominantly inside-out, to
something that extends out into the
What a Social CRM Strategy is All About
By Wim Rampen

14
conversations that customers are having
between themselves. If we want to engage
customers we need to really understand [...] the
jobs customers are trying to do and the
outcomes they are trying to achieve by doing
them. This i s best practice in understanding
customer needs today [...] Once we understand
what customers need, we can innovate around
delivering exactly that [...]. And we can use
service-dominant logic to provide experience
platforms that allow customers to co-create
value together with companies. Co-creating
value with customers is the modern definition of
customer-centricity.”
This is not a light read and Graham Hill has
since written several posts that shed some
more light on the value co-creation concept. I
wrote a post on the definition of Value Co-
creation myself based on (among other)
Graham Hill’s views (you can find links to his
post there) because I had a need myself to
better grasp the concept of value co-creation
and furthermore because I felt the need to be
able to explain it in as few words as possible to
anyone who is newly introduced to the
concept.
I advise you to read the whole post as well as
the comments on it. This has been one of the
most valuable posts for myself when it comes
to better understanding the concept of value
co-creation and the way it differs from different
shades of “co-production” or “mass-
customization” (the differentiating element is
`personalization of experiences - in use`).
A Social CRM Strategic Framework
Statement
If I now take the definition of Social CRM from
Paul Greenberg, the understanding of Service
Dominant Logic, Customer jobs and desired
outcomes as explained by Graham Hill as well
as the differentiating element from the value co-
creation definition, and I put them all together in
context by answering the who-what-how
questions, I get what I would like to define as
the Social CRM strategic framework-statement
as shown below on this page.
Obviously I like it and I will discuss in future
posts what I think the implications of this
statement are for a more detailed strategy.
Of course I am not a guru and I’m definitely not
perfect in what I think and write. So it is now up
to you all to blow it to bits or otherwise let me
know what you like or not about the statement.
And I would appreciate any views on the
implications of the SCRM strategy framework
statement when it comes to building a detailed
strategy.
What a Social CRM Strategy is All About
Continued..
By Wim Rampen
Social CRM Strategy Framework Statement
A Social CRM strategy is about understanding who the Customer is through
listening to, engaging with and collaboration between Customers,
employees and partners. It is aimed at developing innovations, interactions
in networks of relationships that support customers in doing the jobs they
need to do. The means are a personalized design of the service experience
that empowers Customers, employees and partners to influence how well
they can meet their desired outcomes

15
I think most Social CRM definitions share a
company centered logic of building and/or
leveraging a relationship between the
Customer and the company.
I believe we need to let go of the company
centered relationship logic and put Customers'
relationships at the center of our thinking, when
we are designing our answer to the Social
Customer's ownership of the conversation.
Most Customers don't want a relationship
with you.
Your Customers value you mostly on the bases
of their experiences when using your product or
service. That's because they hired your product
or service to do a job for them, that they desire
to do. It's the outcome of the job your
Customers want, not the relationship.
Your Customer's relationships, not yours..
Also from a company's perspective, a
relationship with your Customers is not what
you need most. You need most to understand
what job it is your Customers are trying to get
done. Company's can do that without any
relationship with Customers at all. If the
relationship with Customers was required no
start-up would be able to make it in this world.
Fortunately they do.
Where CRM focused on the Customer -
company relationship, a Social CRM strategy
will only succeed if it centers around ALL of
your Customers' relationships.
And here's why:
Because a Customer does not value a
relationship with the company, but mostly
values the outcome generated from the
experience of using your product or service, it
should not be difficult to understand that
Customers value knowledge or information on
how to improve that outcome, over
relationships (with the company). Even if the
company is involved in providing this
knowledge, it is not the interaction or
relationship, but the actual knowledge or
outcome of the interaction that is of value to
your Customer.
We all understand and experience ourselves
that the Customer does not depend on the
company for knowledge or information.
Customers turn to peers in their networks to
obtain this information, or to rating sites,
Customer support communities and what have
you. And all this information is valued higher
than the information a company provides.
Tap into the knowledge-flow
Hence, in the era of the Social Customer, you
may want to better understand how your
Customers leverage ALL their relationships
(strong and weak ties) and other ways of
tapping into the knowledge-flows that matter to
them, to obtain the information they need to
increase the value they create with the products
and services they use.
Social CRM is not about managing the
relationships with your Customers, it is
(increasingly) about managing the knowledge-
flows through the relationships of your
Customers. And yes, you as a company maybe
part of this eco-system of your Customers'
relationships. But please, don't put yourself at
the center of it..
Social CRM - What Relationships Should
You Care For, And Why?
By Wim Rampen

16
Today I read a tweet by Ray Wang where
he states that he
"doubts Social CRM (SCRM) will replace
CRM. They augment each other. S is just a
new but powerful channel. What do you
think?"
I fully agree that Social CRM will not
replace CRM. I have a different view
though on the meaning of the S. Here's
what I think the S in SCRM is about, and
why:
1. From 1-2-1 to M-2-M
I wrote a post almost two months ago on what
relationships you should care for in Social CRM.
In this post I argue that I believe we need to
completely let go of this company centered
relationship logic and put Customers’
relationships at the center of our thinking.
Hence, in the era of the Social Customer, after
understanding your Customers’ needs, you
may want to better understand how your
Customers leverage ALL their relationships
(strong and weak ties) to obtain the information
they need to increase the value they get from
the products and services they use.
This does not mean that 1-to-1 conversations
between Customer and company are no longer
relevant. Nothing is less true, yet we need to
think of Customers as part of networks, of
which we the company may be a part. And the
company is not at the center of it: the
Customer is.
2. Segmentation the Customer's way
In traditional CRM companies segment
Customers along the lines of socio- and
demographics and/or lines of profitability,
lifetime value and share of wallet. If there is one
thing we (should) learn from emergent on-line
communities it is that people join these
communities to perform a certain job (to-be-
done). This can be a social job, functional job or
emotional jobs, mostly formed around a shared
interest. It is these jobs & interest that bond the
people in a community. On-line (and off-line)
communities are in fact the Customer's natural
way of segmenting. I believe it is not difficult to
understand that capturing the understanding of
the jobs your Customers are trying to do and
the way they are trying to do it, is the Social
CRM way of Customer segmentation.
Again, this doesn't mean that traditional ways
of segmenting have become obsolete. For me it
comes second though. Social CRM is not
replacing CRM, it is extending, or improving, it.
3. A new entry in the front-office
The third reason why the S in SCRM is more
than adding a channel is the new entry to the
front-office. CRM has a clear focus on the
traditional front-office: Sales, Marketing and
Services. With the S added to CRM innovation
made it into the front-office, in my humble
opinion. More and more we see companies co-
develop new products and services together
with Customers (and partners) in close
collaboration. This can vary from inviting
Customers to present new ideas to a full
process of co-development. It is clear to me
though that product development and
innovation departments are having meaningful
dialog with Customers, which, to me, allows
them for a seat in the front-office row of a
Company.
The S in SCRM is not about Social Media
By Wim Rampen

17
4. Breaking down silo's
Breaking down silo's has been on the agenda
for quite some time. Unfortunately, as a
consequence of the high focus on transactions
and transaction efficiency (by example: much of
SFA is basically nothing more than monitoring
transactions, from lead-generation numbers, to
appointment numbers, to RFI's answered
numbers etc etc..), this has not happened.
Specialization and task-oriented jobs have
become the norm in business (no need to
explain I think.. we can all relate, not?), whilst
sharing knowledge and collaboration are
becoming increasingly important in the rapidly
changing and complex systems that we are all
part of these days. If we are ever going to turn
CRM from the inside out to the outside in, we
need to break down the silo's. Before the S
was added to CRM, companies could still get
away with it. Increasing Customer
empowerment is turning this ship around,
through Customers complaining about the
Customer experience in open innovation
communities, by marketing talking to Customer
service if they can help them turn service into
sales (as a consequence of the lack of
outbound sales) etc etc..
Much more water will flow through the Rhein,
before the Silo's will be broken down. For me, it
is a "sine-qua-non" if you want to add the S to
CRM.
5. Answering to the Social Customer
Last, but not least: According to Paul
Greenberg this is the essence of Social CRM,
and I agree. The Social Customer is not (only) a
person that engages through Social Media. The
Social Customer is any Customer these days. A
Customer that is not becoming more vocal and
knowledgeable, but already is. A Customer who
knows how to leverage his voice and
knowledge to his (and his peers') advantage.
Also a Customer that does not want to be
treated as an opportunity for exchange at any
convenient moment, from a Company's point of
view. But a Customer who wants to be treated
with respect and wants to have options to
choose from. Moreover the Social Customer
wants to have influence on how he creates
value from the products and services you
provide.
The S in SCRM is about catering for these
needs and adopting approaches that show
respect for the way the Customer wants to be
treated (this last point in it's essence: no more
unsolicited direct mail, e-mail and outbound-
campaigns, in which unsolicited is very different
from not opting out!).
To conclude: to me adding the S to CRM is
much more than just adding Social Media to
the other channels available for
communications with Customers. Which is also
why I disagree with any definition of Social CRM
that puts the channel at the center of it.
This is my interpretation of the S in SCRM. I'm
interested in learning yours. Please share them,
and your comments to mine, below.
The S in SCRM is not about Social Media
Continued...
By Wim Rampen
Capturing the understanding
of the jobs your Customers
are trying to do is the Social
CRM way of Customer
segmentation.

18
There have been some interesting
discussions around what elements your
Social CRM eﬀorts can or cannot do
without. It started with Bob Thompson
asking whether one can do Social CRM
without Social Media/Networks, or CRM
Systems.
Another interesting thread can be found where
Prem Kumar asks whether Apple is using
Social CRM. I recommend you read both
posts and the discussions in the comments.
These discussions made me think though what
would be the one thing your Social CRM
Strategy cannot do without. THE sine-qua-non
of Social CRM.
In my humble opinion the sine qua non of
Social CRM is: Empowering the Customer in
the process of creating value for the Customer.
This actually is also the missing element of my
previous post: The “S” in SCRM is not about
Social Media. It is not only missing.. it's the key
element that is missing.
Implementing social tools, and doing absolutely
nothing differently than before, would not make
it part of a Social CRM strategy. Just like
adding e-mail or chat to the channel-mix wasn't
truly game-changing. And increasing your
listening capabilities by adding Social Media
Monitoring, however important, is not game-
changing the value creation capabilities of your
Customers either.
From 18 to 2 Use Cases?
Having said this, it is also clear to me what
popular "use cases" under discussion would
not imply a Social CRM Strategy. This does not
mean, by the way, that there's no value in these
use cases. To me, they would be part of regular
CRM or CEM programs, like we have been
running them for quite some years now. They
are either about using or adding the Social
Media channel and tools or improving upon
practices that should have been part of being
Customer Centric long before Social Media.
Again: still lots of value to capture for you and
your company by implementing these use
cases.
The Only Thing Your Social CRM Strategy
Cannot Do Without
By Wim Rampen
Social CRM's value is that it opens up communications
between the company and the customer in a way that allows
the customer to sculpt his own experience with the company
- thus enhancing the value of the company's relationship with
him. [...] meeting the company's objectives on the one hand,
but on the customer's terms on the other.
- Paul Greenberg -

19
I reviewed the 18 use cases of Social CRM
as published by Altimeter early March of this
year. I believe the following 2 use-cases
described there, would fit as use cases for a
Social CRM Strategy sincy they are about
empowering the Customer in the process of
creating value for the Customer (themselves or
their peers, that is). They are about involving
and empowering the Customer in the design
and delivery of experiences:
# 11: Social Support and Service - Peer-2-
Peer Unpaid Armies or Customer Support
Communities - Where smart organizations find
ways to harness the collective expertise
available within their networks of Customers
(and providing the platform for Customers to
exchange that expertise with their peers).
# 13: Social Innovation streamlines Complex
Ideation - Crowdsourced R&D - Where
companies find ways to harness the collective
expertise available within their networks of
Customers for ideation, product development
etc..
All other use cases are smart things to do, but
mainly about doing smart things you (should)
have been doing before. Social tools or
channels may help you to get these jobs done
better than before, but they do not significantly
change the game of providing value for your
Customers.
Use cases as such can be found all around by
the way. They are cases that involve the
Customer to customize the products before
ordering or even build their own (Lego), cases
that bring Customers together in communities
of practice or social networks and allow them
not only to share, but shape their experiences
with their peers (much like Nike + is doing), and
cases that allow your Customers to sell, share
or distribute their own ideas and products
through your platform (E-bay, Amazon,
P&G Connect & Develop etc).
These use cases require a higher level of
creativity and "guts" than just implementing
social media or social tools to existing
processes. They require you to re-invent the
process and, more importantly, to change the
way you perceive your own role and that of
your Customer in that process.
Transferring the power
Acknowledging that Customers own the
conversation is not enough. Having meaningful
conversations on online social networks with
your Customers is not enough either.
You need to design experiences and
experience platforms that will allow the
Customer to influence their experiences or that
will allow your Customer to support their
networks and peers in creating personalized
experiences.
It is about actually transferring the power from
the company to the Customer, and that is much
harder to do, than implementing social tools to
do a better job at the things you (should) have
been doing before. And, in my humble opinion,
it is the most appropriate answer to the Social
Customers' ownership of the conversation.
What do you think? Are you ready to transfer
power to your Customers?
The Only Thing Your Social CRM Strategy
Cannot Do Without Continued...
By Wim Rampen

20
I think trying to define something is a very good
exercise to understand what you are dealing
with or what you are trying to do it for. It also
helps to communicate internally. And regardless
of what many say, I don't think there are
enough definitions of (Social) CRM, at least not
good ones.. But that is a personal opinion, not
relevant to today's post.</em>
If, for whatever reason, you have a need for a
definition of (Social) CRM, please take into
consideration the 5 things you need to know
about (Social) CRM for you to make your own
definition, described here:
1. What's your point of view?
The concept of (Social) CRM has been defined
and explained by many different people inside
and outside "the industry". Be it marketeers,
scholars, IT-consultants, vendors etc etc. they
all have their own point of view, they all take
with them their own backgrounds and biases.
Definitions only tells you so much about (Social)
CRM itself. Definitions will tell you a whole lot
more about the person who made the
definition. And I do not mean that in a bad way.
I do think it is important that you are aware
though, because it will help you understand the
response from other stakeholders that read and
comment on your definition, better..
2. What's your concept of (Social) CRM?
Regardless of the definition you'll read or try to
tweak, it will be one that fits into the following 6
(valid and viable!) concepts of CRM:
• (Social) CRM as a process (or function)
• (Social) CRM as a strategy
• (Social) CRM as a philosophy (or mindset or
logic)
• (Social) CRM as a (cap)ability
• (Social) CRM as a technology
• (Social) CRM as a practice (or as practices)
OR, as a combination of all or some of the
above concepts, in a non-alphabetical order.
Most of the times you'll find that the writers
point of view is highly related to the concept of
CRM he's trying to define. But it's not always
the case. It will not take you a long time to find
a CRM strategy definition from a PR/marcom
specialist. Again, no pun intended.
3. In what context?
(Social) CRM, regardless of your point of view
or the concept you defined, is not similarly
successful under all circumstances. E.g. it
matters if your industry is one with high
commoditized products versus industries with
low commoditisation. CRM is more successful
in highly commoditized industries, because
there it provides a way to differentiate oneself
from competition.. yes.. CRM is what people
mean they need when they say that Customer
service must be a differentiator. They just don't
always realize it..
It also matters if you want to define (Social)
CRM in the context of a recently failed CRM
project within your company, or that you are
just about to start your first. It thus is of vital
importance that you understand and articulate
the context in which your definition is (to be)
used.
4. How does it effect performance?
CRM is at its best when it is supportive of a
business strategy of differentiation and/or cost-
leadership. Most people understand the
differentiation part, because it highly relates to
5 Things You Need To Know About (Social)
CRM (Definitions)
By Wim Rampen

21
the "treating different customers differently"
paradigm it so strongly supports. (Although we
still see many CRM system implementations
with companies strongly holding onto
standardized business processes for each and
every Customer.)
Cost-leadership is basically the first one to think
of. Not so much in relation to higher
efficiencies, but to improved effectiveness. It is
easy to understand that increasing a conversion
rate from 5 % to 10 % can be achieved through
creating the same total number of leads, but
with higher quality, or through creating better
targeting within a smaller number of leads. The
latter is more likely the case in most DM/Cross-
sell programs. Which is fine, because it saves
you from costs to reach out to these targets.
And, most important these days: it also saves
your Customers from being targeted (and trust
me, they don't mind).
What I'm trying to say: don't link your CRM
definition to business performance directly, link
it to the high end strategies everyone supports
and show it supports those strategies.
5. How about your Customers goals?
This is an important reality check.. Research
shows as much as two thirds of your
Customers do not really want a relationship
with you. The even do not expect the benefits
of such a relationship (or could have a low
expectation of such benefits?).. And the
worrying part is that it's mostly the young and
wealthy people who are not interested in these
relationships.
But that doesn't mean you do not need to
develop (Social) CRM (capabilities/strategy/
processes etc etc..). How else are you going to
understand which Customer does and which
doesn't value the relationship? How are you
going to understand what is of value to them,
and let all your people know? How else are you
going to differentiate your service offering based
on such understanding?
And yes, the same seems to be valid for the
Social species as well. Most Customers are just
connecting on-line with brands for the purpose
of getting a perk or discount. They are not there
for the engagement.
Bottom line: never ever (!!) say you need to
do (Social) CRM because your Customers
want a relationship with you..
Last, but not least, I just realized all of the
above is valid for both Social CRM and CRM
(tradizionale if you want ;) definitions. Does this
mean that I'm ready to leave the Social part on
the table and get back to using good old CRM
(of which "social" is an integrated part..). I think
it does.
You? Let me know what you think!
5 Things You Need to Know About (Social)
CRM (Definitions) Continued... (1)
By Wim Rampen
Adopting a Social CRM
strategy is NOT about trying
to get a spot inside
Customer’s circles and at
the same time letting them
wait in the cold after
knocking on your touch-
points door!

22
No, I won't claim Social CRM is dead, to
the contrary. It just isn’t growing up fast
enough to really have a business impact.
This is more likely due to the slow pace at
which companies are responding to changing
market environments than it is due to the
advancement of technology...
There are a few observations I would like to
share with you. Observations I see as hindering
us in the advancement of service being
practiced as the dominant logic, Social CRM as
the supporting strategy and Customer
engagement as it’s underlying tactic.
It's company centric
Companies continue to think mainly how social
technology in general and on-line social
networks can help them, not their Customers.
All talk on Google+ (and any other on-line social
network for that matter) seems to be focused
on how companies can use it to engage
Customers, mine their conversations and to
become part of their circles (to sell them stuff).
Companies continue to ignore that CRM
should shift it’s focus from the Company -
Customer relationship to the Customer -
Customer relationship.
Influence, not value
Social Network analysis is targeted to
understand how influence flows through them.
But it’s not influence that creates value for
Customers. We would make a lot more
progress if we would direct all these resources
to understand how Customer’s value is
created in, and flows through, social
networks. Because this will help us design and
align touch-points that facilitate value co-
creation with Customers, not just supportive
of transactions.
Mono-channel focus
The current logic of many companies is that
investments should flow to mobile and social
channels, because this is where, and how, the
Customer “hangs out”.. They seem to be
forgetting that way too many Customers
continue to fail doing what they need to do at
the “traditional“ touch-points like the Call
Center or the company’s web-site.
Adopting a Social CRM strategy is NOT about
trying to get a spot inside the Customer’s
circles and at the same time letting them wait in
the cold after knocking on your touch-points
door!
Lack of accountability
Social CRM or engagement initiatives are
currently supported by good-will mostly. All
energy is directed to getting social working,
without a clear view on what types of value it
should generate for companies. Most are on
the train, or almost ready to jump on it, few
know where it’s heading. If we are not tying
Customer engagement tactics to Customer
engagement value, your social initiatives will
not outlive the next crisis.
Analyst paralysis
On top of all of the above, analyst firms, like
Gartner, continue to publish quadrants and
posts that make no sense and by doing so
confusing companies even more. (You should
read Paul Greenberg's post on this topic!
He's spot on.)
Observations Why Social CRM Isn’t
By Wim Rampen

23
Catching the wave
The root cause, if you ask me, is that many just
consider this to be a wave that they need to
catch long enough to jump the next one.. To
me it looks like this wave is heading towards
the doldrums, if it hasn’t arrived there already.
And if you do not have a strategy to navigate
those, you should not expect to get out of there
anytime soon!
Observations Why Social CRM Isn’t
Continued...
By Wim Rampen
If there is one person who inﬂuenced my thinking it is Graham Hill. I
highly recommend following him on Twitter and reading his posts over
at Customer Think. Below are the 15 trends Graham described in 2009
that are driving Social Business. That post is as valid as it was three
years ago. A must read.
A Manifesto for Social Business
No1. From Individual Customers… to Networks of Customers
No2. From Customer Needs, Wants & Expectations… to Customer Jobs-to-be-
Done
No3. From Company Value-in-Exchange… to Customer Value-in-Use
No4. From Delivering Value to Customers... to Co-Creating Value with Customers In
No5. From Marketing, Sales & Service Touchpoints… to the End-to-End Customer
Experience
No6. From One-Size-Fits-All Products… to a Long-Tail of Mass-Customised Solutions
No7. From Competing on Products, Price or Service… to Competing over Multi-
sided Platforms
No8. From Company Push… to Sensing and Responding in Real-Time to Customers
No9. From Technology, Processes & Culture… to Complementary Capabilities and
Micro-Foundations
No10. From Made by Companies for Customers... to Made By Customers for Each
Other
No11. From On-premise Applications… to On-demand Solutions from the Cloud
No12. From Stand-alone Companies… to an Ecosystem of Networked Partners
No13. From Hierarchical Command & Control… to Collaborative Hybrid Organisations
No14. From Customer Strategy… to a Portfolio of Emergent Customer Options
No15. From Customer Lifetime Value… to Customer Network Value

24
There are two books I always recommend when I’m talking about Customer
Service. You should read them too.
What I’ve tried most, over the past years of
blogging, is bringing together (Social) CRM,
Customer Experience Management, Customer
Service, Marketing and as of late also
Innovation & Service Design. From my
prespective all these disciplines are trying to
solve the same challenges, but are either
limiting themselves to a speciﬁc discipline,
technology or methodology, or are trying to
compete with the others.
And that’s too bad, because either of the
disciplines has a lot to offer. I even think they all
need each other.
I therefor would like to conclude this booklet
with two posts: The ﬁrst is about Customer
Service and how Managers of Customer
Service Departments should break free from the
silo’d after sales support role. The second one
is about how Marketing with a Service mindset
requires new approaches and most of all 7 new
“jobs” for marketers to perform.
Thank you in advance for taking the time to
read this far. I hope you enjoy the last two
articles, and look forward to your feedback on
my blog at http://wimrampen.com
Chapter IV. Marketing With a Service Logic
And Service With a Marketing Mindset
By Wim Rampen

25
Despite the economic crisis, the rise of the
"Social Customer" and the popularity of
Customer engagement strategies through
Social Media, I sometimes get the feeling
that managers in Customer Services put in
a lot more effort to ensure the company
does not get bad press, or negative "buzz"
in stead of providing a better then
expected Customer service experience.
We know companies do not always take
Customer service seriously. I think though many
managers of Customer Services should start
taking their discipline a lot more serious than
they are doing today..
Apart from the fact that it is useful to improve
waiting & ticket-processing times, Customer's
self-service capabilities, complaints handling,
first contact resolution, quality monitoring
scores and what have you.. I believe there is a
necessity for a more fundamental change in
both the mental model and governance
systems guiding current design and execution
of Customer Services operations. Not only
because great Customer service can be a
differentiator, but mostly because Customer
service needs a (mental) makeover for it to
really become one.
The best service is no service
To date, the best proxy for good and effective
Customer Services (operations), has been set
by Bill Price, with his book (and proven
methodology) "The Best Service is no Service".
You can see a good summary in this
slideshare presentation.
Key to the methodology is that it very closely
looks at what contacts are of value to the
Customer and to the company, continuously
eliminating contacts that are of no value to
both, by means of improved processes etc.
Furthermore reducing time and Customer effort
as well as implementing self-service capabilities
for high value contacts to Customers OR
company. Last, but not least, investing in those
contacts regarded valuable to both Customers
AND company.
The methodology basically prescribes you to:
• Listen to "What (y)Our Customers Are
Saying" (WOCAS)
• Improve your products and processes so that
you do not get repeat contacts and many
complaints
• Implement self-service with the utmost rigor
possible
• Use the remainder of contacts to do smart
up- & cross-selling
• Segment your service (e.g. better service for
high value Customers)
And if you do this well, you'll see that your
Customer services unit does not have to grow,
or can even shrink in headcount (significantly!),
whilst company revenue can double and
transaction volume can multiply with a factor
five (Amazon case).
Five perspectives
Whilst I believe there is a lot of greatness to be
found in this methodology and/or approaches
like Lean/SixSigma, which have similar claims
and approaches, I believe we need a more
fundamental change in perspective to get out of
the "call center is the end of the line or the
organization's drain"-paradigm. And, of course,
to finally start having a real and sustainable
impact on business results, not just sitting on
the cost-side of the equation.
Because It Is Time You Take Customer
Service Seriously
By Wim Rampen

26
I would like to explain so by elaborating on the
"Five perspectives on Customer Services" we
need today.
1. The Value-perspective
2. The Customer-perspective
3. The Experience-perspective
4. The Relationship perspective
5. The Network-perspective
Combining these perspectives and projecting
them onto Customer services operations shows
we are far away from integrating the logic, the
views and ideas that can be found in these
perspectives. All the more reasons to take a
closer look.
1. The Value perspective
The most important shift in logic and customer
services governance we need to make is the
shift in our value logic. The entire governance
system is based on a value-logic that embraces
value to the company and aims at maximizing
Customer value extraction.
The current value logic has been perfected into
such detail that almost every KPI the industry
uses breathes value-to-the-company on each
contact. Some examples:
• A call cannot take longer than 5 minutes
• A call must be solved within the first contact
in 80 % of all cases
• A service representative cannot have more
than zero fatal errors or 2 non-fatal errors in
her quality monitoring sheet.
• Customer satisfaction on the call must be at
least a 6 (on a scale of 0 - 10)
The "transaction" or "interaction" (=the call) is
central to all we are doing. Contact Centers are
managed by the day, the week at most. even
the quality management systems put in place
look at the transaction. 3 mistakes on a call,
and you're out. Maybe, just maybe this
improves Customer Satisfaction on the call, but
if this also relates to improved value to the
company as a whole, or the Customer in
specific, is only assumed, if at all. Besides that:
satisfactory results are good enough, most
certainly if it's possible to reduce costs further
without reducing Customer Satisfaction.
This all may be a little better in the Best Service
is No Service approach, but even there it is the
contact and the transaction that is center to the
approach and the upper right corner of the
value to the Customer vs Value to the Firm
matrix shows "sales campaigns" as one of the
activities to fit in there. I would argue there is no
value to the Customer in being sold to..
Goods versus Service Dominant Logic
To put it bluntly: the Customer Services
management system is designed with a
production-based logic from the pre-war
decades of the previous century. The founding
fathers of Service Dominant Logic (Vargo &
Lusch) name this old logic a "goods dominant
logic".
It is time, contact center and customer services
operations management switch to a Service
Dominant mindset. A mindset that understands
that the Customer can bring more to the table
than money alone, like knowledge, feedback
from her experiences, on all touch-points, not
just the regular survey or after the "feedback"-
button. A mindset that does not see service as
something offered after the sale, but as the
basis for value creation between company and
Customer. And a mindset that values the role of
Service Seriously Continued... (1)
By Wim Rampen

27
the employee, not just the value he/she is able
to extract from the Customer in exchange.
And whilst the "Best Service is No Service"
approach is more than half way of this direction,
most Customer Services (operations) needs to
redefine what it means with "Value Center", for
the current understanding and application has
"goods-dominant-logic" written all over it.
More guidelines as to what this means can be
found in the four remaining perspectives.
2. The Customer Perspective
I did not only not put this one first to avoid the
obvious trap, but more so because I wanted
you to understand first, from the previous
paragraph, that from my point of view most
Customer Services operations are not about
Customers. They are about transactions.
Throughout my career I have not seen one
Manager Customer Services reporting
Customers, not transactions. Not one of them
could say, on a weekly bases even, how many
Customers dialed in, and how many have been
helped to their satisfaction.
They can tell you how many calls they handled,
and what the average satisfaction score was,
but they cannot tell you how many Customers
are considered at risk for retention, because
they had a complaint. But this was not logged
as a complaint, because the Customer did not
use the complaint procedure (usually sending in
a written letter.. )
Hardly any Customer Services manager will be
able to tell you how many unique Customers
call into the call center or visit a service site in
any period, nor what the calls of the heavy
users are about, compared to the light users.
To cut it short: any Customer Services
department that has not already should get
started tomorrow on building a Customer
centered view of their operations, not a
transaction based view.
I guarantee you the "a-ha.. now I see what's
the issue" look on your face.
3. The Experience Perspective
Furthermore it is of vast importance to stop
seeing service as something just offered after
sales when something went wrong. From the
Customer's perspective everything you do is
service (or not, most of the time ;). The way
service is perceived is through the experiences
Customer have over all your touch-points. From
the fine-print to the mail-delivery company
used, to the advertisements in a magazine (with
a coupon for new Customers with a nice
discount..), to the invoice, the payment
arrangement, the collections calls etc etc..
And, more and more experiences from others
are part of the Customer's perspective of the
service you provide, through ratings and
reviews shared by others, whether shared
through (online) social networks or not.
Understanding the Customer's journey
throughout her lifetime should go beyond listing
Customer Services as the after sales touch-
point. The role of Customer Services should
also go beyond providing feedback and
(actionable) insights to the organizations as to
(incrementally) improve the Customer
Experience. Customer Services should expand
By Wim Rampen

28
their horizon by understanding the Customer's
journey and how their key-capabilities to help
Customers when things are not running
smoothly, could be put to use to improve the
Customer's experience when getting her job
done.
4. The Relationship Perspective
The fourth perspective is the Relationship
perspective. CRM traditionally consists of
Marketing, Sales and Service. In the name of
CRM though, many companies have done their
very best to exploit their relationships with
Customers at the lowest possible costs. And
when the relationships comes to a divorce,
companies even ask for alimony. CRM is not
there to improve the Customer's nor the
employee experience, CRM is there to improve
the company's control.
In stead of conversion-rates, revenue per hour
or per contact, I believe the next generation
Customer Services will need to make a serious
effort to manage their Customer interactions
with respect for the (individual) Customer's
lifetime value, network value AND referral value.
These long-term relationship-indicators should
shed a different light on what is important to
manage on a contact, and which contacts are
of value to the company and/or the Customer.
5. The Network Perspective
Last, but not least: in the name of CRM the 1
on 1 relationship between Customer and
company is center. In the meantime, in
Customerland, the Customer, increasingly
armed with numerous social tools, cannot only
solve issues better herself, she can do so faster
than you can, and most of the time even better.
Where your legal department is still fighting over
wording issues, to avoid future compliance or
other legal actions, your Customer is already
doing what has been advised by her peers or
"experts".
Where many companies are stars in describing
what situations are NOT covered by Customer
services, companies that see themselves as
service providers to their Customers, arrange
for their Customers to have access to networks
of Customers and/or experts, outside the
company firewall, to increase the likelihood that
the best resolution is offered in the fastest
possible way, with the least possible Customer
effort. Please take a look at this post by
Laurence Buchanan about GifGaf to see the
benefits of this Network perspective.
To conclude
Best practices in Customer Services are hard to
come by, mostly because bad Customer
service stories have better reach and because
there is more to gain for the story-teller. The
best methodology so far comes from the heart
and mind of Bill Price: The Best Service is No
Service. I do think though Customer services in
general, and the Best Service is No Service, are
in need of a thorough iteration, based upon the
latest insights and developments.
The five perspectives discussed above are not
new in a stand alone way of discussing. I
wanted to bring them together as guiding
principles, with practical implications, for the
future directions of Customer Services
management and governance. Directions that
go beyond operational excellence, process
efficiency and other tactics.
Because it is time we take Customer
services seriously..
By Wim Rampen

29
If there ever was a reason for me to write about
the future of marketing it was in 2009. The
theme though is as alive today as it was then.
Some argue little has changed, others state the
new era has already arrived. And there is Nilofer
Merchant who suggests Marketing is Dead and
then comes up with 5 ways to replace it.
All in itself these five ways are things I can relate
to, but they don't make it as replacements for
Marketing, in my humble opinion.
I recommend you read Ron Shevlin's post, a
response to Merchant's post, titled: The Death
of Marketing (Madness). The subtitle of his
blog (A (Mostly) Humorous Look at Marketing in
the Age of Social Media) says it all. A very
welcome critical and lighthearted voice in this
age of Marketing deadly replacements.
What Really Replaces Marketing
(Madness)
Here's my take on What Really Replaces
Marketing (Madness). I will do so following the
story line of my recent Guest Lecture for the
Marketing faculty, headed by Peter Verhoef, of
the University of Groningen (The Netherlands).
The guest lecture was titled: Marketing
Leadership in age of Service.
I largely agree with Nilofer Merchant that
Marketing needs to change its act. I have had
that feeling for a long time, before 2009, when
working in Customer Services, seeing the
debris of (direct) marketing campaigns, failed
brand promises and what have you. Early 2009
I started reading into the works of Steve Vargo
and Robert Lusch named A Service
Dominant Logic and I was introduced to the
Customer-Jobs-to-be-Done innovation
framework. Both combined provided a thinking
framework that just made all pieces I had in my
mind come together.
Three Concepts Combined
The bottom line in my thinking is that, since
Value is dominantly created in-use and is a
result of co-creation between company and
Customer, marketing strategies should shift
their focus from creating momentum for value
exchange (the sale) to creating momentum for
interactions that support Customers in creating
value for themselves.
And since value is something that can only be
defined by its beneficiary we need to
understand what outcomes Customers desire
when they hire a company's resources to get
their jobs done.
The Customer's journey towards that outcome
is where opportunity for marketing lies to design
service that support Customers, employees
and partners to co-create more (or better?)
value together.
That may sound a bit posh (or a little more than
a bit), but the combination of the three
concepts (Service Dominant Logic, Customer
Jobs-to-be-Done, Service Design) has been a
powerful one for me. Not only to explain the
outside world, but also to drive innovation in
Marketing in my current role.
Three Ways Marketing Needs to Change
Marketing needs to change in three
fundamental ways. First marketeers need to
understand that they need to let go of a
(communication) campaign driven methodology.
Marketeers need to turn into Service Designers
that are capable of designing end-to-end
experiences. And they need not only design,
What Really Replaces Marketing (Madness)
By Wim Rampen

30
orchestrate and market the experience (or value
proposition in Service Dominant Logic
terminology), they also need to ensure the
company's capability to deliver on the promise.
And this also means involving, and taking
responsibility for, company partners in the value
network.
Secondly, marketeers need to start
understanding that it really matters who you
drive through the sales funnel. Goods-logic
Marketeers don't care about the quality of the
lead, Service-Logic marketeers do, because
they truly care about how they make their
Customers feel in the end, and because they
know serving the right Customer is a lot easier
and vastly more profitable than serving just any
Customer.
Thirdly, the next generation of marketeers
should understand that there's more to value in
a Customer than just their wallet. Obviously we
understand these days that a Customer's
connections matter, if only because they can tell
a whole lot more about the Customer, than she
will tell you herself. When seeing Customers as
co-creators a lot more opportunities open up,
like having them do work for you, because the
Customer ends up with a better outcome, or by
valuing their feedback as opportunities to
improve on the Service you provide.
7 Marketer Jobs in the Age of Service
To make it a little more concrete I wrote down 7
jobs Marketers need to get done, if they want
to make it in the age of Service. Here they are:
Marketing's first job is to understand
Customer's jobs & outcomes (or value creation
process) and where in that process they fail to
meet their desired outcome.
This will involve both analytical approaches and
qualitative approaches (like Customer Journey
Mapping) for understanding the voice of the
Customer. And these programs need to be
focused outside the building, not within the
walls of the firm (e.g. internal process mapping).
For their second job Marketers need to build
relationships in communities of individuals with
similar Jobs-to-be-done and desired
Outcomes.
Traditional ways of segmenting Customers by
their age or other demographic qualities have
become largely obsolete in the worlds
individualistic melting pot of cultures, lifestyles
and routines. People bond with people that
think and act alike. People bond with different
people for different outcomes. Think Nike Plus
and you know what I'm talking about.
Their third job is to start supporting Customers
to create value, not doing stuff to create value
to the company.
Stop trying to design a service that helps solve
your problem of liquidity. Solve your Customers
problem and they will solve yours in return.
Sounds like basics, but I stumble upon the self-
centered version still several times a month.
Marketing's fourth job is to design for
interactions that stimulate engagement in these
networks or communities (=your Customer
segment!).
Whereas most businesses seem to be focused
on reducing (costly) interactions with their
Customers, smart companies focus on
increasing value co-creating interactions with
Continued... (1)
By Wim Rampen

31
their Customers and between Customers. Think
GiffGaff and Best Buy as good examples of
companies doing just that. Result? Keeping
costs low and making Customers happy.
More and more I think that the fifth job is one
of the most important ones: engaging
employees and partners in supporting
Customers to co-create value.
You can name it internal branding or your HR-
policy to motivate employees, it is of vital
importance that they understand what you are
doing with your Customers and why, and what
their role is in this journey. I find it helps a great
deal if you get the first job done right. This will
provide you with tangible frameworks and
memes that will make it easier to get people
involved and move towards a pro-active state of
mind, the one that Customers need :)
Your sixth job is to extract actionable insights
out of 360 degree feedback to foster
innovations and design new value propositions
that attract new Customers.
If you don't listen, you don't win. If you don't
improve, you will loose. If you don't innovate,
you'll die (oops.. I did it..)
Your seventh job is to redesign metrics that
capture the engagement value to firm and to
ensure that there is a high correlation to these
metrics and Customer's value created.
If you can't measure, you can't manage. Old
metrics focused on transactions and/or
interactions are there to stay. The new way is to
combine them with Customer value metrics and
not evaluate them in isolation, but as a system
(balanced scorecard still works for me..).
That's it. Marketing's new madness, according
to me. Nothing really complex, but also easier
said than done. And not the only ones either.
You still need to sell you know, so go on and
make nice commercials and create advertising.
Just think different about what you are
advertising for..
And I know it works and that this is a change I
can "sell" to the C-level. Jobs 1 to 7, I'm doing
them a little better every day. You?
Continued... (2)
By Wim Rampen
There are numerous blogs, articles, papers
etc. I’ver read over the past years. I was
about to summarize them here, until I
found this excellent resource-list from
Service360. You can download it at their
website.
While you’re there, please also subscribe
to their blog. It’s excellent!

32
THAT’S IT (FOR NOW).
Please let me know what you think at
http://wimrampen.com

Co Creating the Customer Journey w the Client

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (19)

Similaire à Co Creating the Customer Journey w the Client

Similaire à Co Creating the Customer Journey w the Client (20)

Plus de Steven J Frame

Plus de Steven J Frame (6)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Co Creating the Customer Journey w the Client