• Tweet

  • Mail service

  • Share

  • Save

  • Get PDF

  • Buy Copies

  • Impress

The Idea in Cursory

All successful firms must blueprint a compelling offering and manage the workforce to deliver it at an attractive price. Merely service firms must practise even more: deal with the frustrating fact that their customers tin wreak havoc on service quality and costs.

For instance, a customer dithering at a fast-nutrient counter slows things down for everyone else waiting in line. An architect's client struggling to clarify how a new facility volition be used drags out the design procedure.

To tackle this challenge, Frei advises aligning iv key elements of your business:

  • What your service offering consists of
  • How you fund the excellence you want to provide
  • How you lot manage employees to deliver quality service
  • What you do to help customers enhance—not erode—service

Get these elements pulling together, and none of them can pull your concern autonomously—as service stars like Wal-Mart, Commerce Bank, and Cleveland Dispensary take discovered firsthand.

The Idea in Practice

To consistently deliver service excellence, ensure that each of these 4 elements reinforces the others:

Service Offering

Determine how customers define "excellence" when it comes to your offering: Convenience? Friendliness? Flexible choices? Price? Identify what you'll practice to deliver that excellence—and what you won't do. Instance:

Commerce Bank decided to serve customers who prized pleasant, confront-to-face up service and convenience. It offers evening and weekend hours, buildings with high ceilings and natural light, and a fun contraption for redeeming loose alter. Despite its relatively unattractive interest rates and narrow product range, its retail client base has expanded dramatically.

Funding Mechanism

Call back about how you lot'll pay for the increased cost of the excellence y'all're seeking to provide through your service offering. Possibilities include:

  • Charging the customer. For instance, Starbucks customers value lingering in the company's coffee-firm setting. To fund this inviting temper, Starbucks charges a premium for its java.
  • Spending now to save later. For instance, Intuit offers customer support service free of accuse. It uses callers' input to better future versions of its software, so customers will ultimately need less support.
  • Having customers do the work. For example, airlines' self-check-in kiosks not simply reduce costs; they besides enhance the service offering past liberating travelers from long lines at staffed counters and past providing convenient tools such as seat maps.

Employee Management

Ensure that your workforce management activities (recruiting, selection, training, job design) empower employees to deliver the excellence embodied in your service offerings. Example:

Commerce Bank competes on extended hours and friendly service, not on low price or product variety. Information technology knows information technology doesn't need straight-A students to master its express product set, and then it hires for attitude and trains for service. For case, it uses simple recruiting criteria, such as "Does this person smile in a resting state?" And it encourages employees to recruit people they meet providing dandy customer service in other industries.

Client Direction

Clear which behaviors customers must demonstrate to get the well-nigh value from your service. And then design your service specifically to foster those behaviors. Example:

To get customers using the new self-cheque-in kiosks, airlines ensured that travelers could complete the transactions with far fewer keystrokes than check-in personnel used to demand. By contrast, retail stores that offering self-service checkout machines haven't fabricated using those machines easy for shoppers. Moreover, the stores expect shoppers to shoulder responsibility for fraud prevention past weighing bags during checkout. Result? Anxious customers avoid the machines.

Equally the earth'south major economies have matured, they take get dominated by service-focused businesses. Only many of the management tools and techniques that service managers use were designed to tackle the challenges of product companies. Are these sufficient, or practice we need new ones?

Let me submit that some new tools are necessary. When a business organisation takes a product to market, whether it's a basic commodity like corn or a highly engineered offering like a digital camera, the company must make the product itself compelling and likewise field a workforce capable of producing it at an attractive price. To exist sure, neither job is like shooting fish in a barrel to practise well; enormous amounts of management attention and academic research accept been devoted to these challenges. But delivering a service entails something else as well: the management of customers, who are non just consumers of the service merely tin also be integral to its production. And considering customers' involvement equally producers tin wreak havoc on costs, service companies must also develop creative ways to fund their distinctive advantages.

Any of these four elements—the offering or its funding mechanism, the employee management system or the customer management arrangement—can be the undoing of a service business. This is amply demonstrated by my assay of service companies that have struggled over the by decade. What is merely every bit clear, yet, is that there is no "right" way to combine the elements. The appropriate design of any i of them depends upon the other three. When nosotros look at service businesses that accept grown and prospered—companies like Wal-Mart in retail, Commerce Banking company in banking, and the Cleveland Clinic in health care—it is their effective integration of the elements that stands out more the cleverness of whatsoever element in isolation.

This article outlines an approach for crafting a profitable service business based on these four critical elements (collectively called the "service model"). Adult equally a core teaching module at Harvard Business organization School, this approach recognizes the differences betwixt service businesses and product businesses. Students in my class larn to call back most those differences and their implications for management exercise. In a higher place all, they learn that to build a swell service business, managers must become the cadre elements of service design pulling together or else risk pulling the business apart.

i. The Offering

The claiming of service-business management begins with design. As with product companies, a service concern can't terminal long if the offering itself is fatally flawed. It must effectively run across the needs and desires of an attractive group of customers. In thinking nearly the design of a service, still, managers must undergo an important shift in perspective: Whereas product designers focus on the characteristics buyers volition value, service designers practice better to focus on the experiences customers want to have. For example, customers may attribute convenience or friendly interaction to your service brand. They may compare your offering favorably with competitors' because of extended hours, closer proximity, greater scope, or lower prices. Your management team must be admittedly clear well-nigh which attributes of service the business will compete on.

Strategy is often divers equally what a business chooses not to do. Similarly, service excellence can be divers as what a concern chooses non to do well. If this sounds odd, it should. Rarely do nosotros propose that the path to excellence is through inferior performance. But since service businesses commonly don't accept the luxury of but failing to deliver some aspects of their service—every physical store must take employees on-site, for example, even if they're non peculiarly skilled or plentiful—near successful companies choose to deliver a subset of that package poorly. They don't make this choice casually. Instead, my research has shown, they perform badly at some things in order to excel at others. This tin can exist considered a hard-coded trade-off. Recollect about the visitor that can afford to stay open up for longer hours because information technology charges more than the contest. This business is excelling on convenience and has relatively inferior performance on toll. The price dimension fuels the service dimension.

Service excellence can be divers as what a business chooses not to do well.

To create a successful service offering, managers need to determine which attributes to target for excellence and which to target for inferior performance. These choices should exist heavily informed by the needs of customers. Managers should discover the relative importance customers place on attributes and then match the investment in excellence with those priorities. At Wal-Mart, for example, ambience and sales assist are least valued past its customers, low prices and broad selection are nearly valued, and several other attributes rank at points in between. (See the exhibit "Wal-Mart's Value Suggestion" in David J. Collis and Michael Chiliad. Rukstad's article "Tin Y'all Say What Your Strategy Is?") The merchandise-offs Wal-Mart makes are deliberately informed past these preferences. The company optimizes specific aspects of its service offering to cater to its customers' priorities, and information technology refuses to overinvest in underappreciated attributes. The fact that it takes a drubbing from competitors on things its customers intendance less about drives its overall operation.

The phenomenon, of form, has a circular aspect. Shoppers whose preferences match Wal-Mart'due south strengths self-select into its customer base. Meanwhile, those who don't adopt Wal-Mart's attributes buy elsewhere. It is important therefore to identify customer segments in terms of aspect preferences—or as some marketers prefer, in terms of client needs. Identifying what might be called customer operating segments is not the same exercise equally traditional psychographic segmentation. Rather than stressing differences that enable increasingly targeted and potent messaging, this blazon of segmentation aims to find populations of customers who share a notion of what constitutes first-class service.

Once an attractive customer operating segment is found, the mission is clear: Management should pattern a new offering or tweak an existing i to line up with that segment's preferences. Look, for example, at the fit achieved past Commerce Bank, which has been able to abound its retail customer base dramatically fifty-fifty though its rates are among the worst in its markets and it has made express acquisitions. Commerce Depository financial institution focuses on the set of customers who care about the experience of visiting a physical branch. These customers come in all shapes and sizes—from young, first-time banking clients to fourth dimension-strapped urban professionals to elderly retirees. As an operating segment, all the same, they all believe that convenience is a bank's nearly important aspect and cull Commerce Bank because of its evening and weekend hours. Second well-nigh important to them is the friendliness of interactions with employees, and then the promise of a cheerful, familiar teller has become part of the banking company's core offering. Commerce has added to its branch ambience with interior elements both lovely (loftier ceilings and natural calorie-free) and fun (an amusing contraption for redeeming loose alter). When information technology comes to attributes less important to the depository financial institution'southward customers—toll and production range—direction is willing to cede the battle to competitors.

It is tempting to remember, "If I'g a really good manager, then I don't take to cede annihilation to the contest." This well-intentioned logic can lead, ironically, to non excelling at annihilation. The only organizations I have seen that are superior at most service attributes demand a toll premium of 50% over their competitors. Most industries don't support this type of premium, and and then trade-offs are necessary. I like to tell managers that they are choosing between excellence paired with inferior functioning on ane hand and mediocrity across all dimensions on the other. When managers understand that inferior performance in one dimension fuels superior functioning in another, the design of fantabulous service is non far behind.

2. The Funding Mechanism

All managers, and even almost customers, concord that in that location is no such thing every bit a free tiffin. Excellence comes at a price, and the toll must ultimately exist covered. With a tangible product, a company'south mechanism for funding superior performance is ordinarily relatively simple: the price tag. Only the customers who forfeit the extra cash can avail themselves of the premium offering. In a service business, developing a way to fund excellence can be more than complicated. Many times, pricing is not transaction based only involves the bundling of various elements of value or entails some kind of subscription, such equally a monthly fee. In these cases, buyers can extract uneven amounts of value for their money. Indeed, even nonbuyers may derive value in certain service environments. For example, a shopper might spend fourth dimension learning from a knowledgeable salesperson, just to leave the store empty-handed.

In a service business concern, therefore, management must give careful thought to how excellence will be paid for. There must be a funding mechanism in identify to permit the visitor to outshine competitors in the attributes information technology has chosen. In my study of successful service businesses, I've seen the funding mechanism take four basic forms. Ii are ways of having the client pay, and two cover the price of excellence with operational savings.

Accuse the customer in a palatable way.

The classic approach to funding something of value is simply to have the customer pay for information technology, but often it is possible to brand the form that payment takes less objectionable to customers. Rarely is that washed with à la menu pricing for the niceties. A large part of Starbucks'south appeal is that a customer can linger almost indefinitely in a coffeehouse setting. It's unthinkable that Starbucks would place meters next to its overstuffed chairs; a meliorate way to fund the atmosphere is to charge more for the coffee. Commerce Bank is open late and on weekends—earning it high marks on extended hours—and information technology pays for that service by giving a half pct point less in interest on deposits. Could information technology fund the extra labor hours by charging for evening and weekend visits? Perhaps, but a slightly lower involvement rate is more palatable. Direction in any setting would practise well to creatively consider what feels fair to its customers. Often, the to the lowest degree creative solution is to charge more than for the detail service feature you are funding.

Create a win-win betwixt operational savings and value-added services.

Very clever management teams discover ways to enhance the client experience even while spending less (finding, in other words, that in that location tin can be such a thing as a gratuitous lunch). Many of these innovations provide only a temporary competitive advantage, as they are quickly recognized and copied. Some are surprisingly durable, notwithstanding. An example is the immediate-response service provided past Progressive Casualty Insurance. When someone insured by Progressive is involved in an auto accident, the company immediately sends out a van to help that person and to appraise the impairment on the spot—often arriving on the scene before the constabulary or tow trucks. Customers honey this level of responsiveness and give the company high marks for service. But in apprehension of such a demand anytime, would they pay more in insurance premiums? Unfortunately, no. People are pathologically toll sensitive about car insurance and most never select annihilation but the stone-bottom quote. The central to Progressive's ability to fund this service is the cost savings it ultimately yields. Normally insurance providers are subject to fraud, with criminals making claims for accidents that were staged or never happened. Because of these and other types of disputed claims, firms as well incur high legal fees—which, combined with the other costs of fraud, add together up to some $fifteen out of every $100 in insurance premiums beyond the industry. Since deploying its vans, Progressive has seen costs in both categories plummet. Sending a company representative to the scene pays for itself.

Progressive offers another customer convenience that many competitors take and then far shied away from: giving quotes from other providers alongside its own when a potential buyer inquires about the cost of insurance. It's non that Progressive is adamant to go one better than rivals to win the business. In fact, Progressive's is the lowest quote only most half the time. What Progressive does believe is that its quote is the correct one given the probability of that person's getting into an accident—a probability that the insurer is best in class at determining. If indeed its quote is spot-on, then allowing a competitor to insure the customer at a lower rate is doubly effective: It frees Progressive from a money-losing proposition while burdening its competitor with the unprofitable account. Thus a level of service that looks downright altruistic to the customer actually benefits the company. This is an example of leveraging operations into a value-added service.

How can your management team find win-win solutions of its own? When I pose this question to managers, their impulse is to imagine what new value could be created for customers and then to ponder how that could be funded through cost savings. I suggest beginning instead past request, "Where are our biggest cost buckets?" With these in mind, managers can so simultaneously determine how to reduce costs and create a value-added service. A practiced first place to look? Anywhere that fourth dimension is a large component of price. Removing fourth dimension is frequently fruitful, since it can directly better service even as it cuts costs.

Spend now to save later.

Oft it is possible, if somewhat painful, to make operational investments that will pay off eventually by reducing customers' needs for auxiliary service in the future. A classic example is Intuit's decision to provide gratis customer support, in defiance of the software industry norm. Telephone call centers are expensive to staff because of the combination of technical knowledge and sociability required to field inquiries effectively. Customers meanwhile are extremely uneven in their neediness vis-à-vis information technology. For most software makers this adds up to the obvious decision that customers should be charged for support.

Intuit founder Scott Cook sees the matter differently. Those needy calls, he believes, are a useful form of input to continued production development—the engine of future revenues—and that justifies an fifty-fifty greater expense outlay. Intuit has its higher salaried product-development people, not solely customer service people, fielding calls so that subsequent versions of its offerings volition be informed by direct knowledge of what users are trying to attain and how they are beingness frustrated. This is part of a broader commitment to feedback-driven improvement that Melt refers to as "DIRST"—for "practice it correct the second time." The investment has paid off in better software, which means a lower call volume. "Our competition thinks we're crazy," Cook says, and he understands why. "If nosotros got equally many calls as they do, we'd be out of business organisation."

Accept the client practise the piece of work.

One other blazon of funding mechanism for enhanced service puts the cost back in the customer's courtroom, but in the form of labor. Offering self-service, from pump-your-own gas to cocky-managed brokerage accounts, is a well-established way to go on costs low. If the goal is service excellence, though, you must create a situation in which the customer will adopt the practise-it-yourself capability over a readily available total-service alternative. Airlines have achieved this, at last, with flight bank check-in kiosks, although the value proposition they initially presented was dubious. At first, passengers felt compelled to utilize the relatively unappealing kiosks just considering carriers had allowed the lines in front of manned desks to become intolerable. Today, however, frequent fliers prefer the kiosks because they provide readier access to useful tools like seat maps. Businesses looking to attain service excellence in other settings should non take such an indirect route. They should set themselves the challenge of creating self-service capabilities that customers volition welcome. Indeed, if a self-service option is truly preferable, customers should be willing to take on the work for nix or even pay for the privilege. When managers designing cocky-service solutions are not permitted to add together the inducement of cost discounts, they are forced to focus on improving the customer experience.

If a self-service pick is truly preferable, customers should be willing to have on the piece of work for nothing or fifty-fifty pay for the privilege.

Whatever funding mechanism is used to cover the costs of excellence, it is best thought out as thoroughly equally possible prior to the launch of a new service, rather than amended in light of experience afterward. When a service that'south been perceived equally complimentary suddenly has fees associated with it, customers tend to react with disproportionate displeasure. And since companies cannot thrive by offering service complimentary, it is vital that they not set expectations that tin't be sustained. With careful assay and design, a company tin can offer and fund a better service experience than its customers would enjoy elsewhere.

3. The Employee Management System

Companies often alive or die on the quality of their workforces, simply because service businesses are typically people intensive, a relative advantage in employee management has all the more impact there. Elevation management must requite conscientious attention to recruiting and choice processes, training, job blueprint, performance management, and other components that make up the employee management organisation. More than to the point, the decisions made in these areas should reflect the service attributes the company aims to be known for.

To blueprint a well-integrated employee direction system, start with two simple diagnostic questions. Outset: What makes our employees reasonably able to achieve excellence? Then: What makes our employees reasonably motivated to achieve excellence? Thoughtfully considered, the answers will translate into visitor-specific policies and programs. Companies that neglect to connect the dots between their employee management approaches and customers' service preferences will find information technology very hard to honor their service promises.

At one large international retail bank I studied, a senior manager had come to a depressing realization. "Our service stinks," she told me. Under her guidance the bank took various measures, mainly centering on incentives and training, but the problem persisted. Customer experience in the branch did not amend. Perplexed but determined, the executive decided to become a frontline employee herself for a month. She idea it would accept that much time to experience a typical range of service interactions and see the roots of the problem. In fact, information technology took one twenty-four hours. "From the time the doors opened, customers were yelling at me," she reported. "By the terminate of the day, I was yelling back." What became clear was that employees were set up to fail. Recent cross-selling initiatives had created a set of customers with more than complex needs and higher expectations for their relationship with the bank, but employees had non been equipped to respond. As a result of decisions made by the management team (all individually sensible), the typical employee did not have a reasonable chance of succeeding. The bank's employee management system was broken.

If your business requires heroism of your employees to continue customers happy, then you take bad service by design. Employee self-sacrifice is rarely a sustainable resource. Instead, design a system that allows the average employee to thrive. This is part of Commerce Banking concern's competitive formula. Recall that the bank chooses to compete on extended hours and friendly interactions and non on depression cost and production latitude. At present think how that strategy could inform employee direction; the implications are not hard to imagine. For case, Commerce concluded that it didn't require straight-A students to chief its limited product set; it could rent for attitude and train for service. In job interviews, its managers could apply simple weed-out criteria—similar "Does this person smile in a resting land?"—rather than trying to maximize across a wide range of positive characteristics. The bank's current employees could exist deployed every bit talent scouts, on the principle that it takes one to know one. (When people from Commerce run into someone providing great service in another setting, whether at a eating place or at a gas station, they hand out a card printed with a compliment and a suggestion to consider working for Commerce.)

It's a simple reality that employees who are above average in both attitude and aptitude are expensive to apply. They are not simply bonny to you lot but also bonny to your competitors, which drives upwards wages. A concern that wants to maintain a competitive price construction volition probably demand to compromise on one quality or the other (or, if it insists on having both, find a style to fund that luxury). If, as Commerce Banking company does, y'all cull to rent for attitude, then you must engineer things so that even lower-bent employees will reliably deliver great service. Like managers who don't want to acknowledge that their service is designed to be inferior on some attributes, many people are reluctant to admit a trade-off between aptitude and attitude. Just failure to accommodate this economic reality in the design of the employee management organisation is a common culprit in flawed service.

iv. The Client Management Arrangement

In a service environs, employees aren't the only people affecting the cost and quality of service delivered. The customers themselves can exist involved in operational processes, sometimes to a very large extent, and their input influences their experiences (and often other customers' too). For example, an architectural firm's client may explain the purpose of a new facility well or poorly, and that will affect the efficiency of the design process and the quality of the end product. A customer who dithers at a fast-food counter makes the service less fast for everyone behind him.

Customer involvement in operations has profound implications for management because it alters the traditional office of the business in value creation. The classic production-based business concern buys materials and adds value to them in some manner. The enhanced-value product is then delivered to customers, who pay to receive it. In a service business, all the same, employees and customers are both part of the value-creation process. A principal do good is that customer labor can be far less expensive than employee labor. It can also lead to better service experiences. When students participate more than in a classroom environment, for example, they acquire more. But there are challenges, every bit well. Designing a organization that explicitly manages these challenges is essential to service success.

Consider the issue of customer option. Service designs may call for customers to perform important tasks, but for the most part customers have no interview, no background check, and no personality profile. Every bit a former senior executive from Nestlé now working in financial services put it, "I could control who was in my factory at Nestlé; I have no such control over the customers in my bank's branches."

In addition, despite many organizations' best efforts, customers are not as easy to train every bit employees. In that location are usually many times more customers than employees, and creating constructive training materials for such a large, dispersed, unpaid, and often irrelevantly skilled workforce is difficult. When this holds true, firms must accommodate the limited training in the blueprint of the service experience. If tasks are shifted from employees to customers—from higher-skilled to lower-skilled people—then they must be adjusted accordingly. Airlines seem to get this correct. Recall (if you lot can) the final time you checked in with an agent at the full-service counter. Chances are yous witnessed the agent consummate a dizzying sequence of keystrokes. It would not seem reasonable to expect customers to perform these aforementioned steps, and and so when the check-in role was transferred to customers, it was dramatically simplified. By dissimilarity, think of the cocky-service supermarket checkout. Hither customers are asked non but to do what trained employees have done previously but also to shoulder the additional responsibleness of fraud prevention through a complicated process of weighing bags. Asking customers to perform more-complicated tasks than higher-skilled employees contributes to the disarray and anxiety that surrounds these checkout lines.

Customers also accept a cracking deal of discretion in their operational activities, usually far more than than employees. When a visitor introduces a new process that it wants employees to use, it can simply upshot a mandate. When customers are involved, transitions like this can be significantly more than complicated. Await at Zipcar, the popular car-sharing service. To keep costs low, its service model depends on customers to clean, refuel, and return cars in time for the side by side user. Motivating employees to perform these tasks would be routine; motivating client-operators has required a complex, evolving mix of rewards and penalties.

In managing customers in your operations, then, you'll demand to accost a few key questions: Which customers are you focusing on? Which behaviors exercise you want? And which techniques will about effectively influence behavior? For example, a company whose business model depends on customers' timeliness—whether it'south a dental office packing its appointment calendar or a video shop circulating hitting films—may utilise more than- or less-heavy-handed tactics to ensure compliance. In a previous article for Harvard Business Review ("Breaking the Merchandise-Off Between Efficiency and Service," Nov 2006), I related lessons from several companies that have used a range of techniques to change customer behavior. These techniques can be divided into two bones categories: instrumental (the carrots and sticks we commonly run into play out equally discounts and late fees) and normative (the utilise of shame, blame, and pride to motivate united states of america to return shopping carts and pick up trash even when no ane is looking). The important thing is to manage customers in a way that is consequent with the service attributes yous've chosen to emphasize overall.

Integrating the Elements

Successful service companies have a working program that incorporates all four elements of service design. Within each of those areas, however, it is difficult to spot any best do. This is because the whole business depends more than on the interconnection of the four than on any one element.

A standout case of effective overall integration is the Cleveland Clinic, which is consistently ranked amidst America'south almost eminent hospitals and has been a leader in pioneering cardiac care for decades. It's hard to put a finger on the source of that advantage. The fact that the clinic has specialty centers focusing on diabetes, for example, or cardiac intendance is not exceptional in itself. Its refusal to attach fiscal rewards to doctors' productivity is unusual merely might not exist effective elsewhere. Step back from the details, however, and the bigger picture emerges. Attracting the highest-severity patients means that doctors will always face a challenging environment in need of innovative solutions. Organizing into illness centers rather than narrower, more traditional lines of specialization (such every bit kidneys or blood) sets the stage for cantankerous-disciplinary collaboration—and thus for novel perspectives—within those centers. Removing productivity incentives gives doctors license to spend time on innovation, which is enhanced by their shut work with specialists from other fields. The particular choices fabricated on methods, processes, and personnel are the right ones for the Cleveland Clinic because they complement one some other and come together in a smoothly operating organization.

Whatever service visitor, no affair how long established, tin benefit from a review of its operations using the framework laid out in this commodity. Bringing the four elements of service design into tighter alignment can be an ongoing process of pocket-size tweaks and experiments in modify, inspired by the kinds of questions included in the sidebar "Diagnosing Service Design." A direction team planning to launch a new service will find the framework particularly helpful. Information technology flags the decisions that should exist made early and in tandem and then that they don't clash downwardly the route. And at the highest level, it underscores two very of import principles of service design. First, there is no such thing equally a skillful thought in isolation; there is only a good thought in the context of a specific service model. Second, it is folly to endeavor to be all things to all customers.

The success or failure of a service business comes down to whether it gets 4 things right or wrong—and whether it balances them finer. Here are some questions that will sharpen managers' thinking along each dimension and assistance companies estimate how well their service models are integrated.

ane. The Offering

Which service attributes (convenience? friendliness?) does the firm target for excellence?

Which ones does it compromise in order to achieve excellence in other areas?

How do its service attributes friction match upwardly with targeted customers' priorities?

2. The Funding Mechanism

Are customers paying as palatably as possible?

Can operational benefits be reaped from service features?

Are there longer-term benefits to current service features?

Are customers happily choosing to perform work (without the lure of a discount) or merely trying to avoid more-miserable alternatives?

3. The Employee Management Organization

What makes employees reasonably able to produce excellence?

What makes them reasonably motivated to produce excellence?

Have jobs been designed realistically, given employee selection, training, and motivation challenges?

four. The Customer Management System

Which customers are yous incorporating into your operations?

What is their job design?

What accept you washed to ensure they take the skills to do the job?

What have you washed to ensure they want to do the job?

How will you manage any gaps in their performance?

The Whole Service Model

Are the decisions y'all make in ane dimension supported by those you've made in the others?

Does the service model create long-term value for customers, employees, and shareholders?

How well do extensions to your core business organisation fit with your existing service model?

Are you trying to be all things to all people—or specific things to specific people?

The first point notes the importance of fit, mentioned earlier as a central strength of the Cleveland Clinic. At the dispensary, direction knows that extensions to its core business must be examined closely for their fit with its existing service model. The arrangement recently abandoned the concept of a loftier-stop wellness and spa offering because it didn't build on the infirmary'southward core operational strengths. In some ways this seems like an obvious signal, only managers often stray into areas of relative weakness, particularly when they see a firm they consider to be a straight competitor succeeding with a service they don't notwithstanding offer. Progressive made this mistake when information technology decided to venture into the home insurance marketplace. No question, there is coin to be made in habitation insurance, equally innumerable firms take shown. Simply Progressive failed in its attempt because the challenges of that business did not match up with the company's competitive strengths. Call back that Progressive is justifiably proud of its analytics advantage, which enables it to effectively size upward the risk that a given policyholder volition file a claim. Unfortunately, that kind of actuarial prowess is not every bit central to making a profit on insuring homes. Home insurers rise or autumn on the management of their investment portfolios—and that is a relative weakness of Progressive. (Firms typically lose money on the insurance but make coin investing prepaid premiums.) The fit, in retrospect, was a bad one. It should have been seen that style early on on.

Merely every bit common a failing is the misguided desire to be all things to all people. In today'due south service economy, it is about incommunicable to design a service model to cover a huge range of customers and remain competitive across them. Instead, firms should design their service models for more targeted excellence by beingness specific things to specific people.

Peachy service companies are, almost without exception, very clever about selecting their customers. We saw this in Progressive'due south highly informed pick of whom to do business organization with. Commerce Bank, from its beginnings in 1973, knew it should stake out its ain claim on the market. "The world," its founder Vernon Hill said, "did non need some other 'me-too' bank. I had no capital, no brand name, and I had to search for a way to differentiate from the other players." Shouldice Hospital, a Canadian specialist in hernia operations, is highly selective most its customer base. Not just does it serve but patients experiencing a certain type of ailment, it has the luxury of operating on otherwise healthy people. Information technology has skimmed the foam of the marketplace.

Becoming a Multifocused Firm

Inevitably, companies that attempt to be all things to all people begin to struggle when upstart competitors like Shouldice start picking off profitable niches. Often, the reject is not taken seriously until it'southward too late. (See the sidebar "Coming to Terms with the Threat.")

How do incumbents react when a focused entrant appears on the scene? The usual response seems to follow four distinct stages of "strategic grief."

Dismissal. The incumbent perceives the aspirant as a nonthreat. It is a deceptively easy assessment to make, given that the focused business firm has optimized its service model to be deliberately proficient—and bad—at certain aspects of the incumbent'due south business.

Sadness. Next comes a sense of loss equally profitable customers start to defect. They are willing, if not eager, to make the trade-offs inherent in the aspirant'southward service model.

Relief. Sadness is replaced by relief as the realization dawns that only i of the incumbent's customer segments is being targeted by the focused aspirant. The new competitor may win on a few dimensions of value and take certain customers abroad, only in that location are all the same many other segments to serve!

Dread. Finally, the larger threat reveals itself. The problem is non this single entrant; it's the inevitable attack of focused firms on other fronts.

Spotted in fourth dimension, the threat of focused competitors can exist met effectively. Is there a troubling area of competitive activity on your radar screen? If and so, don't be lulled by its small scale and isolation. Move quickly to sympathize what's going on there. In item, focus on the entrant's rate of comeback along critical measures like marketplace share, share of wallet, and service quality. Benchmarks of absolute difference tin can fool managers into believing that the threat is not imminent. But when a new competitor improves faster than you practise, the gap presently closes.

One time you larn the threat is real, explore your potential advantages. Tin can you lot compete effectively equally a "multifocused" house (one that targets multiple niches rather than trying to tackle everything)? The threat needs to be addressed with humility. The temptation will be great to believe that "our style" remains the better mode. If annihilation, enlarge the fact that information technology is not, and keep from that assumption to arts and crafts a competitive response.

All the same, some incumbents have managed to compete effectively with their more-focused rivals, and there is much to learn from their experience. The common thread in their competitive responses to upstarts is the capacity to become "multifocused." In other words, they stopped trying to encompass the unabridged waterfront with a single service model. Instead they pursued multiple niches with optimized service models—each designed to achieve excellence on some dimensions at the expense of inferior functioning on others. The hole-and-corner to success in a multifocused business firm is the ability to benefit from having various service models under i house umbrella. This benefit oft comes in the grade of shared services (that is, internal service providers), which enable a business firm to generate economies of scale and economies of feel across its service models. Effectiveness at utilizing shared services to the advantage of the individual service models can determine the success of a multifocused firm. (See the exhibit "Are Focused Competitors Nipping at Your Flanks?")

Highly focused firms are the bane of big, established companies. Because they laser-target sure customer segments, they are able to optimize their service models. The service quality they provide, using specialized employees and a customized product set, is potent. By contrast, incumbent firms typically concenter a mix of customers, hire and develop a variety of employees, and—as a consequence of excellent, well-intentioned suggestions from both groups—are rampant product proliferators.

The shared services architecture can be seen in multifocused corporations across industries—from Yum Brands, a collection of five fast-food companies, to Omnicom, which consists of hundreds of companies in the interactive-marketing infinite, to GE, which seems to take no limit on the markets it tin can enter. Each corporation has created singled-out service models for distinct customer operating segments and gauges the overall do good of the models past assessing how much they gain from one another. What determines whether a visitor has assembled the correct portfolio of service models? It comes down to a critical test: Is each of the house'due south distinct service models improve off every bit a result of the others? If the answer is no, it signals that operation is about to pass up or that the company may want to spin off some service models. If the answer is yes, it's about e'er thanks to superior direction of shared services, and the incumbent thrives.

The services shared in multifocused companies typically include concern functions like finance, purchasing, it, human resources, and executive grooming. The scale advantages they provide are straightforward and include pooled purchasing, preferred access to credit, and other price-related benefits. Economies of experience are more than hard to realize only tin can also be more than valuable. Here, the challenge is to utilise knowledge gained in one service model to strengthen the performance of the others. To a limited extent, this kind of knowledge transfer occurs informally; this has always been the hope and promise of diversified companies. The of import difference in successful multifocused firms is that they formalize the process, designing very explicit ways of leveraging experience across service models. Knowledge transfer is facilitated by deliberate investments in such programs as formal best-do sharing; centralized, dynamic employee training; and the rotation of managers amidst models.

My research convinces me that the best means of sustaining growth in a service business is to utilise the multifocused model, yet it is also evident that this model requires concentrated endeavour to defend. Leaders of private service models constantly assert that dedicated, rather than shared, resources would do more than to strengthen their ain businesses. Operations managers, meanwhile, raise a chorus of complaint that shared services require more-vigilant control "below the line" if they are to deliver the necessary economies of scope and experience. Given the perpetual assault on the model, information technology may not exist surprising that some other common characteristic of successful multifocused firms is directive (even autocratic) leadership. This leadership mode accommodates different personalities, merely information technology always relies on senior managers who are able and willing to exert potent influence on subordinates. They must be, in society to balance the competitive autonomy of individual service models with the collective value of shared services. Without potent, centralized leadership, revenue-generating line managers typically overrule shared-services managers, particularly in moments of strategic distress. Indeed, companies frequently stack the deck by placing stronger leaders in the service models than in the shared services, finer undermining the performance of the organization.

The Management-Do Frontier

Management scholars, and non a few practitioners, have taken up an interesting fence in recent years: Is the field of study of management fundamentally unlike in service businesses than in production businesses? The way in which management is studied and taught in graduate concern schools was forged in the context of the industrial economy. Are the approaches that worked for manufacturing companies equally applicative to services?

Every bit service businesses go on to innovate, succeed, and be studied, the answers are condign clearer. The framework presented here suggests why the traditional techniques accept proved as durable equally they have and why they still go out sophisticated managers wanting more. Much of what determines the health of a production business—the soundness of its offering and the direction of its people—is only as indispensable in a service business and can be addressed with a like tool kit. Merely whole new areas involving the roles of customers have opened up, and their tool kits are only now existence assembled.

A version of this article appeared in the April 2008 upshot of Harvard Business Review.