Identify and aligning to Successful Customer Outcomes
“Businesses can be very sloppy about deciding which customers to seek out and acquire” Frederick F. Reichheld
The six questions we ask ourselves in this iterative process are:
I.    Who is the customer?
At  first glance should be an easy answer however it is not as obvious as    it seems. The ultimate customer for any profit making enterprise is   the  person, or company who provides the revenue by purchasing the   products  or services we produce. It is a matter of fact that in our   inside-out  legacy world we have created multiple customer-supplier   relationships  which include internal ‘service’ providers such as   Information Services,  Human Resources and so on. In mature Outside-In   organisations the  internal customer ceases to exist as we progressively   partner to align  to Successful Customer Outcomes and artefacts such  as  Service Level  Agreements become a thing of the past.
II.    What is the Customers current expectation?
The  2006 book “Customer Expectation Management “ Schurter/Towers   reviewed  in detail the of creating and managing customer expectations   and how  through clear articulation companies such as Virgin Mobile in   the US  redefine their market place. In the context of the SCO map we   need to  understand the customers (as identified in the answer to   question 1)  current expectation. This often reveals both a challenge and    opportunity. Customers will tell it as it is, for instance in an    insurance claim process “I expect it is going to take weeks, with lots    of paperwork and many phone calls”. That should tell you the current    service is most likely poor and fraught with problems, delays and    expensive to manage however this presents the opportunity. If that is a    market condition (all insurance claims are like this) then moving to a    new service proposition will be a potential competitive    differentiator.   
III.     What process does the customer think they are involved with?
In  the inside-out world we see process in a functional context.    Therefore insurance claims are dealt with by an insurance claims    department. Customer Retention is the baby of you guessed it, the    Customer retention department and marketing is done by the marketing    people. This split of responsibility is a legacy of functional    specialisation created by relating to business as a production line.    Adam Smith wrote in ‘The Wealth of Nations’ (1776) of an English pin    factory.  He described the production of a pin in the following way:    ”One man draws out the wire, another straightens it, a third cuts it, a    fourth points it, a fifth grinds it at the top for receiving the head:    to make the head requires two or three distinct operations: to put it   on  is a particular business, to whiten the pins is another … and  the   important business of making a pin is, in this manner, divided  into   about eighteen distinct operations, which in some manufactories  are all   performed by distinct hands, though in others the same man  will  sometime  perform two or three of them”. The result of labor  division in  Smith’s  example resulted in productivity increasing by 240  fold. i.e.  that the  same number of workers made 240 times as many  pins as they had  been  producing before the introduction of labor  division. The insights  form  Smith underpinned the industrial  revolution however using this  principle  to organise ourselves in the  21st century is to a very large  part the  wrong approach. That is  precisely what the answer to the  question will  tell us – “sorry sir  you are talking to the wrong  department, let me  transfer you”. Or even  getting stuck in automated  response system hell  “press 1 for this, 2  for that, 3 for the other and  4 if you have missed  the first three  options.” These are features of  the labor division  mindset. Ask a  customer what process they think they  are and you will  frequently be  surprised by the answer.
IV.    What do we do that Impacts customer success?
Often  we ask customers to do numerous many activities which appear    sensible  to receive service or indeed buy products. Relating back to    the insurance claim we can see rules and procedure around how to make    claims, the correct way to complete forms, the process of collating the    information, the timeframes within which to claim, the way we can    reimburse you and more.  Often times these restrictions that we impose    made sense at some time in the past however they may no longer be    relevant. 
The situation is compounded by the way  internal functional specialism   focus on project objectives. Richard  Prebble, a respected New Zealand   politician writes in his 1996 book  “I’ve been thinking” of the inability   of organisations to think  clearly of the amount of work they create  and  in fact “they spend a  million to save a thousand every time”.
His story of the challenge  within large organisations is typical “The   Post Office told me they  were having terrible problems tracking   telephone lines … They found  an excellent program in Sweden which the   Swedes were prepared to sell  them for $2m …. So the managers decided   to budget $1m for  translating into English and another $1m for   contingencies. But, as  the general manager explained, it had turned out   to be more expensive  than the contingency budget allowed and they  needed  another $7m. “How  much”, I asked, “have you spent on it so far?”   “Thirty-seven million  dollars” was the reply. “Why don’t we cancel the   programme?” I asked  “How can we cancel a programme that has cost  $37m?”  they asked   “Do  you believe the programme will ever work?” I  asked “No,  not properly”  “Then write me a letter recommending its  cancellation and  I will sign  it” The relief was visible. I signed the  letter, but I knew  I needed  new managers.” 
This type of inside-out thinking causes  companies to create apparently   sensible checks and controls within  processes that actually manifest as   customer inconvenience, cost and  delay. Are you making the customers   lives easier, simpler and more  successful?
V.    The Successful Customer Outcome – what does the customer really  need from us?
At  this point we should have enough information to objectively create    several statements that articulate the SCO. These statements should be    specific, measureable, attainable, relevant and time-bound (SMART).    Usually there will 6-10 such statements which become the actual key    performance measures as move the process Outside-In. For example a North    American business school completed the SCO map and created these    statements from the customer perspective for an ‘Education loan    application’ process:
a.    I need to receive my financial assistance
b.    I need to receive aid  before the semester starts
c.    I need to attend the classes I have chosen
d.    I do not want to call to chase progress
e.    I need to receive the correct amount
f.    I do not want to have to fix your mistakes
There  is no ambiguity here and we avoid a common mistake of using    management weasel words such as ‘efficient, effective, timely’ which may    mean things internally but to a customer are of little help. Creating    SCO statements that may be used as measures for process success is a   key  aid on the journey to Outside-In. 
VI.    And now we reach the core of the onion. What is the  one line   statement that best articulates our Successful Customer  Outcome?   This one-liner embodies the very nature of the process  and sometimes the   business we are in. In ‘Thrive- how to succeed in  the Age of the   Customer’ McGregor/Towers (2005), Easyjet (Europe’s  second largest   airline) is used as an example in this quest. Their  simple “Bums on   Seats” SCO sentence works both from a company  perspective (we must   maximise utilisation, offer inexpensive seats,  get people comfortably   and safely to their destinations) and the  customers needs  “I need a   cheap safe seat to get me to the sunshine  quickly without a fuss”.   
The company one liner will become part of a series which are measureable through the SCO statements and can be tested and revised depending on evolving customer expectations and needs. It may in fact ultimately replace the inside-out strategic process and provide the organisation with its Raison d’être.
Of course when we start the journey it is often sufficient to create SCO maps to help grow understanding and even if the actual SCO Map is subsequently replaced (as we take a broader view) the improvement in understanding around the customer is invaluable.
In the third part of this four part series we will review “Reframe where the process starts and ends”
Join us on LinkedIn www.linkedin.com/groups?mostPopular=&gid=1062077
Visit additional resources www.oibpm.com
Become  a Certified Process Professional www.certifiedprocessprofessional.com 

