It’s the never-ending story of finding the right balance.

How much support do our clients need?

How many service agents do we need in place to effectively provide quality service?

How can we better set up and train clients to use the system?

How can we provide more effective “self help” options?

How can we make the use of our software easier and more intuitive?

If you’re looking at those questions and saying, “All of them need work,” you’re right.

There’s no one right answer, and even if there was, it’s probably interrelated to three or four others. There’s no magic formula, no secret sauce we can pour over the heads of our employees and make client attrition simply disappear.

But if you’re like me, you’d probably like to know what was working and what wasn’t. What has the biggest impact, what’s going to make the biggest difference right now (hence the need for active, engaging customer service, and CRM principles).

As Jack Trout’s “Law of Singularity” states, “In each situation, only one move will produce substantial results.”

Implementing the move itself is the easy part.

Knowing how to find it isn’t.

But then you see an idea like this, and you just have to stand back, appreciate it—and then share it.

Ingenuity and effort still make for great inventions, great people, and great companies.

You have to wonder what possessed a guy to invent a table saw that would stop running when it detected a human appendage near the blade.

And you also have to wonder why someone didn’t invent it sooner.

Now obviously I’m a big believer in the power of technology to transform inside sales and marketing processes. When I started 20 years ago as a sales manager at then Franklin Quest (now Franklin-Covey), the coolest technology on the market at the time was a fax machine.

Now we have CRM, dialers, sales force automation, automated email and drip campaigns, iPhones in every pocket, streaming video, the Web, SEO and PPC, blogs, Twitter, LinkedIn . . . .

But the fact is, the longer I stay in this business, the more I realize that in many cases, when a company uses technology to help them solve a problem, the most valuable part of the process isn’t the technology—it’s the reexamination of the process itself.

Sure, new technologies can make dazzling improvements to productivity, but it’s the insight gained by really focusing on the problem that often becomes the most valuable asset of change.

Sales consultant Dick Lee has a fabulous article that partially addresses this issue, stating that throwing technology at a problem without redesigning the process and attitudes surrounding its use is a near sure-bet failure.

So why are we so hesitant to address process?

• Because it’s uncomfortable.
• Because we have to actually change.
• Because it means we have to admit that we may have been wrong in the past.
• Because a lot of people have invested a lot of time, energy, and money into developing the current process.
• Because in some cases, changing a process means employees’ reputations are at stake.

As much as I want it to be true—because it’d mean my company would make a whole lot more money—simply throwing technology at a problem doesn’t inherently solve it. Confusing a technology problem with a process problem leads to costly, sometimes fatal mistakes.

So the next time you get pitched by a technology vendor with something that’s going to “revolutionize” your company, don’t necessarily be skeptical. Just make sure that you couldn’t solve the same problem by simply talking to Bob or Jill down in production, and making a clear, definable process change.

A few thoughts about Apple’s recent PR problems:

1. When your client has a real problem, simply telling them “You’re holding it wrong” isn’t a real solution.

Even if it’s the truth, clients and prospects rarely want to hear that their process is to blame. Even if it is actually part of the problem, be extremely careful and proceed with caution. A lot of people at the client’s organization have spent a lot of time and energy putting the current process in place.

2. As dense as the general public (read: your clients) often seem to be, they can tell when you’re pushing spin, and when you’re really trying to solve their problem.

You think that the G4’s buyers, many of whom had owned earlier iPhone iterations, were excited to hear that their brand new hardware had an engineering defect, only to have Apple saying to the press, “It’s no big deal, just buy our slip case for it!”? Ignoring a problem doesn’t make it go away, it just comes across as arrogance.

3. Be extremely cautious about what you treat as a “random outlier,” and what you treat as a real problem.

Bad news never travels well. You think the V.P. of production wanted to have a meeting and tell Steve Jobs, “Hey, um, I think there’s a problem with our antenna design?” How soon did Apple know they had a problem on their hands? Within the first 5,000 units sold? The first 25,000? First 50,000? (Some seem to think Steve Jobs showcasing the Apple slip covers during the product launch meant they knew about it all along.) One of the biggest problems that leads to disaster is the fact that employees don’t want to communicate bad news for fear of the consequences. If your employees don’t feel empowered enough, or trust management enough to let you know when you have a real problem, your corporate culture is in dire need of change.

4. If it’s real, own the problem.

The words “Yes, but . . . ” should never leave your lips until the problem is solved. Clients and prospects don’t want to hear about how amazing you were six or 12 months ago. Don’t point the finger at other vendors, or other people in the company. “Well, if So-and-so Technologies had made Widget X properly, we wouldn’t be having this problem.” It’s not their problem, it’s yours. Fix it.

5. When you definitively know there’s a problem, act decisively, act now, and tell your clients what you’re doing about it.

The worst thing you can do in a situation like Apple’s is to “circle the wagons” and go silent. Open channels of communication tells your clients that you’re more interested in actually fixing the problem than in trying to save face. Be proactive.

It is the VETERAN, not the campus organizer,
who has given us freedom to assemble.
 
It is the VETERAN,  not the lawyer,
who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the VETERAN,  not the politician,
Who has given us the right to vote.
 
It is the VETERAN who salutes the Flag,