WHAT WE LEARNED FROM UNCLE SAM ... (AND THE QUEEN)

A slightly improved  ‘please pay your taxes’ letter netted the U.K. 15 percent in unexpected revenues.

A ten percent cut in military energy expenditures was predicted when processes were changed in mid-air refueling, in vehicle usage, and in equipment handling.

And for many years, experts have stated that highway speeds of 60 mph, reduced from 70 mph, would save 2 percent of all U.S. household energy.

Common sense?  Well, sorta.  Within the relatively new discipline of behavioral science, changes in human actions and reactions can account for some amazing results.  And though in many cases academics rule  this philosophy and these procedures, it’s we as communicators and marketers and designers who make transitions happen.

Think with us here as we expostulate on three of ‘their’ principles:

  • Frame the change in language that appeals to the audience.  Hmmm:  Ever send the same message to front-line customer service reps as you would to an R&D organization?
  • There’s a bias towards the status quo.  Benefits folks will swear on a stack of comp statements that the choice to opt out of a new program yields a higher number of recruits than making an active choice … or opting in.
  • Make it easy.  We favor checklists, fill in the blanks, almost anything that’s a snap to finish and send.

A few years ago, the U.K.’s Behavioral Insights Team, with a budget of a mill or so (in US $$), performed so well that the government now mandates behavioral science as a civil servant course.  Business, take notes!

GOOD ENOUGH: Is it, er, good enough?

While reading (belatedly) an interview with Larry Light, the then-new chief brands officer at Intercontinental Hotels, we braked hard at this sentence:  “Doing fine is not fine.”  [That quote, from Light’s CEO, segued into how this well-known marketer is upgrading and revamping/realigning the brand.]

Which got us to musing:  How many of us would actually say that … and mean it?

It’s one thing to spout the multiple mantras of continuous improvement, urgency, and burning platforms, phrases often associated with the change world.  It’s another to express discontent with reality – even though it might look pretty good to outside (and inside) observers – and begin making shifts.

Many change masters insist on building a compelling case for making things happen.  They talk to the critical needs of appealing to both hearts and minds, emotions and facts.  News of change on the way ricochets through the halls and plant floors, along with the names and accountabilities of task forces.  Implementation begins, goes onward, then is completed.  Now what?

Those who measure ROIs (and non-successes) of those efforts tell us that a majority never quite meet the assigned metrics.  Our burning question:  Was this a dramatic change, positioned as an “either/or”?  Or are employees and executives rewarded for following the dictates of Lean Manufacturing, Six Sigma, and other methodologies continually, rather than all at once?  Will those two very different situations differ in results delivered?

There’s no answer, yet.  The next time someone comments that “whatever” is pretty good or good enough, we’d suggest a sharp self-scrutiny is in order.