Reward Programs are NOT About Manipulation

Twitter pointed me to this post by Guy Kawasaki on a recent Philip Kotler presentation about the new definition of Marketing.  The image that Guy put up is below.

I like the idea that marketing is now about connecting the companies "why, what & how" to the individuals head, heart and spirit.  But what struck me when I saw this image wasn't that there were differences on the two axis (company vs. individual) but that it is really a mirror image.  In other words - whatever the company wants to achieve through their mission, vision, values - must be mirrored in their customer base. 

It's a huge mental shift from trying to change individuals to fit the company to defining what the mirror image of the company is in individuals - and letting them hook up with you. 

We've moved from marketing to and now we're defining for - our employees, customers and partners.

Alignment NOT Manipulation

From a reward and influence standpoint it is more important to clearly define yourself (the company) across the elements of "why, what, how" - and connect your program goals and objectives across the mirror image of those elements for your audience.

The goal should be to develop alignment - not manipulate.  

Too Much "What"

A well designed activity should reinforce the values of the individual within the context of the company.  No initiative should drive behavior that is in conflict with the company OR the individual.  And it needs to cover all the bases for the company - "what, why, how" - AND connect to the individual head, heart and spirit. 

I think we've seen too many programs that are strong on the "what" and have nothing to say about the "why" and "how."  If you drive only the "what" - you get the unintended consequences we've read about in the headlines.  The "why" and the "how" are critically important to get the long-term results you want.

If we worried more about finding the mirror image of what the company wants in what the individual wants and desires, we can drive alignment and not worry about manipulation. 

If we design programs to target the mirror image of the company's mission, vision, values in the individual, we connect - not coerce.

Sure there will always be companies that do reward wrong - who will focus on coercion and manipulation - but alignment is the best long-term strategy.

Comments

[Scott Crandall]

Paul --- Thinkin' about the 'why', 'how' and 'what', it strikes me that most companies approach these backwards: the 'why' is the key.
Inadvertently or not, the 'why' is the reason we do the rest. It's the culture, the milieu in which we exist. It needs to be consciously built, then maintained by daily validation, example and reinforcement -- and truly, the leaders need to spend a lot (the bulk?) of their time exampling, explaining and refining the 'why'.
The 'how' are processes -- certainly important, and perhaps critical, but they come second. The 'what' -- unfortunately the subject and object of too much of our time and effort -- is least important.
I believe if you get the first two (especially 'why') right, the accomplishment of 'what' becomes little more than a by-product of the others.
Little wonder that so many organizations are afflicted with "Flavor of the Month" disease.

[Paul Hebert]

Here, here! Totally agree - the why is the most important and always should be first and drive the others. The "how" in my mind also includes some "ethical" stuff outside the processes.