The giants don’t always win. Why relationships matter and transactions are a small part of the sales process.

I remember as a child walking to the corner drug store – literally. It was located on one of the corners in the downtown square where I grew up. It was the main drugstore of the town and everyone knew the pharmacist family who owned it. A pretty popular place!
 
Sure, they were successful because they owned the main drugstore in town, but they were more successful because everyone trusted them. The owner had a fantastic personality – such a fun guy! They provided sound medical advice when you couldn't reach your doctor. They would answer questions about your prescriptions. And at the time, there was no Internet available to research symptoms and remedies, so this was a godsend. They were like the stand-in doctor we all needed from time to time, available to help on weekends, off-hours, sometimes holidays if there was a real emergency.
 
And they carried medical devices (or could get them for you), trinkets and other novelties. It was quite a store!
 
When the big pharmacies came into town – think CVS and Walgreens – sure, the corner drugstore felt the sting of large, low-priced pharmacies with huge stock. And the drugstore felt the rise of the mail-order pharmacies. But this same corner drugstore is STILL in business. Actually, along the way they grew in storefront size and in what they carried.
 
Apparently, there is room for smaller, local pharmacies among the giants. But why?
 
Giant megastores killed a lot of businesses in industries like bookselling, apparel (think boutiques and shoe stores), sporting goods, food, liquor, office supplies, stationery, and more. They are able to buy in extreme bulk and pass that saving on to you. But at the same time, there are independent boutiques, booksellers, stationery stories, and more still in business today. Restaurants aren't all corporate and named Cheesecake Factory or Chili's. There are also some local, independent liquor stores and not just the supermarket-styled megastores that sells everything from Blue Nun to fine Georgian wine.
 
In fact, there has been a rise in local businesses. Local artisans who make beer, cheese, bread, pastries, and other fine goods are growing as a trend. As are smaller specialty grocers. As are software and app companies. As are innovators who are disrupting markets and established businesses like healthcare with home visits.
 
It makes you wonder if the death of some stores is really due to megastore pricing or if there is something else, something deeper, happening here.
 
We all want to buy more for less, but do we always buy based on lowest cost?  I don't think so. If that were true, then the smaller stores that provide something special would all be gone by now. And I think the special touch is about relationships and connecting with customers. 
 
 
People buy products generally because they are looking to solve a problem. Even if someone buys something for fun, he is buying an item for emotional benefit as well.
 
Why do people choose the products they do? There is a logical driver and an emotional driver, and sometimes the emotional driver is stronger than the logical driver. And a factor isn't only buying the product itself; you need to consider the vendor you are buying from.
 
If purchasing really were as simple as completing a transaction, purchase decisions would all be based on price and the megastores would have it. But they don't.
 
What are some of the reasons why we choose to buy or work with one vendor over another? 
  • Service and advice. We sometimes take this for granted by companies, but we really shouldn't. Not all companies will openly give objective advice. Many will give advice to keep you at their store and buy their products. But there is something to be said for a company that gives you advice that benefits you and meets your needs rather than their own bottom line and profit. That perspective builds trust – and ultimately, an emotional relationship. 
  • Shipping and time to receive product – this is key. Amazon is successful because they have fast delivery. From when you order to when you receive it is about 2-3 days. And it is free for Amazon Prime members. Now we have all grown to expect shipping to be free or low-cost as well as fast. Hearing a package taking a week to be delivered seems too long now. People want to go online and buy what they want when they want it and get it even faster. 
  • Having a storefront. There are some items that need to be purchased in person, especially high-cost items (and yes, high-cost is based on perspective). We want to see how that China pattern looks in the light and in person. Or the nuances of flatware. Or a car and how experience how it rides. Apple has a storefront so you can experience their computers. Believe it or not, this builds trust. If you, Mr. Company/Vendor, aren't afraid for a prospect to look at, touch, and experience your products that tells me that you trust me to touch and try (under supervision, of course) before I buy. In fact, you so strongly believe that this approach – me experiencing your products first-hand – will help sell them that you provide a place for this to happen.
  • Cost. When all else is equal, people will make their purchase decision based on cost. So what does "all else is equal" mean? Services, advice, trust, relationship. They all factor into the decision. Why would I choose a vendor over Amazon, who has a great return policy, lots of stock, and great delivery options? The other vendor offers the same delivery turnaround, it's something I won't be returning, and that other vendor gave me great advice a while back. In the end, I have a better relationship with that other vendor. Money isn't everything.

Some other examples:

Why do I choose something like Virgin America versus another airline that may cost less? It's not just the points. I trust the experience will be pleasant – or at least tolerable – for the flight. There will be no hidden fees. And food I can eat.

For a computer, people choose Macs and iPads because they don't want to fret with connections and want an operating system that is easy to use. They are more expensive, but there is another driver for their decision.

  • Quality of product for the price. Great quality product for the price builds trust in a brand. If you feel ripped off – well, you won't purchase again, now will you? If you purchase meat that spoils quicky, you won't go back to the store. If you purchase a phone that breaks frequently, you'll get a different phone.
  • Easy. We tend to forget this one. We all like to do business with a company that is easy to do business with. What does that mean? (I wrote a blog post defining this.) Well, companies that don't give you a hard time when you want to return something. Or a company is upfront and honest about what is included in the price of the product (batteries, support, etc.). Be easy to do business with – that's a huge turn-on for most customers.
  • How you feel when you interact with the store. We decide to go to some stores and not others based on how we feel when we are there. Do we feel helped? Important and valued? Like we are learning something new? Purchasing something precious?
The reason we visit some stores and not others is similar to why we are friends with some people and not others. It's how you feel when you are around them. Do you like how you feel? Do you agree with the values of the store? Do they align with their values?
 
 
As you can see, there is more to purchasing and interacting with a company than simply completing a transaction. There are a number of logistical factors that, when combined, can influence a emotional decision. Or one could say, depending on how a company exhibits and demonstrates those logistical factors impacts emotional decisions. What you do is a reflection of who you are. And it's all part of the experience. 
 
The giants definitely have their place, especially for low-cost transactions. However, cost is not the only factor to consider in a purchase. This makes it possible to fight a giant and gain marketshare. Remember: business is done between people. Business is about more than a transaction – it's about the relationship between the customer and the company. 
The giants don’t always win. Why relationships matter and transactions are a small part of the sales process.

Thoughts on how the USPS created their own experience downgrade. But there’s hope – they can be relevant again.

My relationship with the US Postal Service starts during happier times…

I got a post office box in the Prudential Center in Boston when the Post Office re-opened a new facility there. I was excited. I worked in the Prudential Center complex and the post office box made it very convenient for me to pickup and drop-off my mail. 

Post office

I loved going to the Post Office – and not just to get my mail. When I needed stamps, I could go to a vending machine and get a book of stamps in two shakes. My complaint about the setup was that the machines gave dollar coins as change and didn't accept credit cards. Minor, but still. And I couldn't just get books of stamps; I could even buy individual stamps from these machines. This post office had a special counter to buy materials for packages and sometimes send a package. 

There were so many locations for the Boston Post Office. You could find one downtown, in Back Bay, the master one at South Station. And they were near important places – or a few blocks away. You never had to walk too far to find a post office.

The best part about the Boston Post Office was how you could send a bill payment or letter to a Boston company and it was delivered the next day. I tested the consistency of next day delivery frequently. There were many nights where I would dash to the South Station Post Office just before midnight to make a next day delivery for a bill payment. It was better than email or paying electronically! I was always suspicious of online payments. It was early – 1997, 1998 – and the security just wasn't there from my perspective. Further, when the banks did online payments many were using the mail too. There weren't many companies that had a direct payment. (I believe today the companies that don't accept a direct payment from a bank are the exception not the rule.)

Then I moved to San Francisco. I realized the wonder of the USPS was regional.

I had a post office box in this copy center in Cupertino. Or was it Milpitas? Anyway, I was in between places in San Jose. When I finally made it to San Francisco in my new apartment, I didn't yet send a change of address card to the US Postal Service because my mail was already being forwarded to Milpitas. I figured I'd let some mail trickle to San Jose for the time being and change my mailing address for all my bills directly to my new address in San Francisco. That way I would know if I changed everything I wanted. 

I thought that was a brilliant plan.

But it wasn't. According to the mail carrier for my block, because he didn't get a card, he didn't think anyone was living in my apartment and returned all mail addressed to me. Yes, you read that correctly. He continued delivering junk mail and mail addressed to people who no longer lived there (like a bunch of different random names) but decided that the mail sent to this new name, Mary Brodie, me, shouldn't go to that address. What I found bizarre about this nonsense was that if you notice that mail is coming addressed to this new name, like a lot of different pieces of mail, wouldn't you start to wonder if someone new lived there?

Anyway – the guy was disciplined and life moved on and I got my mail. Finally. Or so I thought.

Mail took over a week to get across the country from Boston or New York to San Francisco. In a time when mail was competing with the Internet, I didn't understand this at all. So I decided to pay all of my bills online so payment would make it in time. At that time, direct payments were more common. I started noticing that in addition to this week delivery timeline, it was difficult to get to any post office anyway. They were at inconvenient locations, not on main streets. Or in malls that weren't in the middle of action.

My relationship with the USPS was waning.

Packages were difficult to get. I had to go to a Post Office nowhere near my house. I believe there was one nearby, but to the US Postal Service, that wasn't in the area servicing me. I did get packages stolen because the carrier left a package at my doorstep when I wasn't home. Yeah. Nice. 

Then one day when I was at a Post Office picking up a package, I noticed that the post offices no longer had vending machines selling stamps in them. Sure, the vending machines may have been difficult to repair, but they were convenient. This new complicated device replaced them. It would "help" you figure out how much postage was required to send a larger letter, package or whatnot. It was for smaller items. The device asked a lot of questions. 

Usps-kiosk_medium

They went from simple vending machines to having this very complex self-help package weigh machine to put the right postage on boxes. It didn't make much sense to me. Then I noticed that to keep pace with FedEx and UPS, they started offering other services, but the services to send package were simply too complicated. 

It became complicated and overwhelming to go to the Post Office. It became so manual in a time of automated transactions.

The lines got longer. They stopped selling stamps separately. Everyone had to be in a single line to do anything – drop off a package, pick up a package, get stamps. They combined simple tasks with complicated transactions.

The USPS downgraded it's experience from automated and easy to manual and cumbersome. Sadly, it was its own doing.

The main competitor of the Post Office had been the Internet. The Boston area held back this competitor because it essentially offered the same services as the Internet, mainly next day delivery. They had convenient locations. Easy to access stamps. They made doing business with the Post Office easy and convenient. Not many other cities did.

By making everything difficult about the experience – the time to send a package or letter, the way to get stamps, the packing skills needed to ship anything – the USPS discouraged people from using their services. Other options like UPS and FedEx became easier to work with.

Location is still a factor. Location matters.

I remember when I moved to Dallas, there was a fantastic Post Office facility near my apartment. It was right off of one of the main highways. It had lots of parking, a huge lobby, lots of people working there. They had some vending machines and it was super easy to get stamps and the like. But then it closed down. 

On Monday, I waited in line for 30 minutes to send one envelope and two packages. I don't go to the post office because of the lines. Usually, I make purchases and send gifts online.  However, as I was waiting in line, I saw most people ahead of me buying stamps. There were no machines available for people to buy them. And there were only 3 poor souls attending the counter. When I went to send my package, the attendant asked if what I had was fragile or contained perfumes. I guess that indicated special pricing? They offered countless ways to ship. They told me that I should have wrapped the jewelry pins I sent in additional bubble wrap even though it was a bubble wrapped envelope. It was difficult. And it wasn't the attendant's fault. It was the Post Office. They have made the experience complicated.

Compare this with a trip to UPS. I can walk into UPS with a bag of stuff I want to ship. Recently, I shipped my belly dance teacher in San Francisco a bunch of old costumes I don't wear for her students to use. At UPS, the staff takes your stuff, weighs it, asks you when you want the recipient to get it and done. You get to go home. They don't ask you 400 questions. They don't offer you 400 shipping options. The site does, but the store makes it simple. That's what the US Post Service needs to do. Make shipping simple again.

The good news is that since the US Postal Service partnered with FedEx and ups, they are delivering packages faster. Items aren't getting lost. It's a better service.

Hey, USPS, the world has changed! Here are some ways to change with it and become relevant again.

Sadly, the US Postal Service hasn't realized that the world of shipping and communication changed. They didn't keep pace and in the process, made themselves an irrelevant entity. I think they could become more relevant than a partner for FedEx and UPS if they focused on what people need in this new world.

  • Support special occasion mail – holiday cards, wedding invitations, other special invitations. Although the art of letter writing has taken a nosedive, many still like to send cards and invitations and will use the mail for special occasions. Make stamps special to place on such envelopes. Make them easy to buy for different sized and weighted mail pieces. Maybe even sell them in grocery stores or Target. Or revive vending machines. 

This could revive the art of letter writing if stamps are easier to purchase. They could make mail stylish again. I know that many are starting to send mail for marketing purposes because it gets attention. No one gets mail in the mailbox anymore. Using the US Postal Service makes you stand out.

  • Packages. It's hard to compete with FedEx and UPS. UPS has the packing service figured out and well managed. I'd suggest maybe not replicating that. However, maybe the USPS could provide advice on the site for how to pack different shaped and styled items. Or better yet, offer different easy to pack methods. More bags. More fun shaped boxes. More spacer items. Get creative. Make it so people don't know how to be the perfect packer. Maybe all people would need to know how to pack is how to match shapes and colors with bags, foam and other gadgets. 
  • Track letters – and not make it more expensive than sending a letter using a stamp. This could be possible today, so why not just do it? It's a little bit of an added step, but to be able to track a letter from start to finish would be such a powerful service. It would compete with FedEx – and could be cheaper. With the improved package service, an improved standard delivery would be fantastic.
  • Automate where you can. Sure, automation causes people to lose their jobs, but making people wait in line for 30 minutes to buy a stamp is unacceptable. People don't like to wait in line anymore. Find a way to make the easy tasks easier. It seems the UP Postal Service went backwards with removing those devices.

If the US Postal Service did these things, they may make themselves relevant again. I know I would send more cards and letters if it were easy to do that. I'm sure others would too.

USPS needs a new focus: Make it easy to use mail again. It seems that they lost their way somewhere during the rise of the Internet.

 

 

Thoughts on how the USPS created their own experience downgrade. But there’s hope – they can be relevant again.

Why are we afraid of empathy?

 
 
I think we can all agree that business is driven by relationships between people. And we can agree that people are emotional beings.
 
This means that business and life has a lot more emotions to it than we like to believe. 
 
If we are honest with ourselves, we probably would say that many of us in Western culture tend to avoid emotions in general. Emotions are squishy and we tend to think that they guide us to make impulsive and misguided decisions – almost like the Mariah Carey song above. We are told time and time again that the brain and rational thinking keeps us on-track. So we believe that.
 
Sure, we use spreadsheets and presentations and diagrams to make analyses, but is that what really drives decisions?
 
The dirty secret about emotions is that what you are feeling at any time reflects how you perceive what’s happening in your life.
  • You are happy when you believe life is going your way.
  • You feel in love when you meet a romantic partner who sweeps you off your feet.
  • You are sad when you lose something of great importance to you.
  • You are angry because something didn’t go as you wanted or someone did something to cross you.
With that in mind, basing a decision on how you feel isn’t always a bad thing. Again, we are emotional beings so making a decision based on what feels good to you – makes you happy, gives you joy – should be a reasonable reaction. 
 
In the West we like to attribute emotions to women, but that’s not true in all cultures. Emotions are for everyone (ask Margaret Mead).
 
In my opinion, we in the West, particularly of US and certain European cultures, are afraid of those pesky emotions, so we avoid them and embrace rational thought.  But again, we are emotional beings and life isn’t entirely rational so this decision doesn’t always work. We fall into a tailspin when we can’t rationalize away why people make a certain decisions, especially if they are driven by emotional factors. Emotions become mysterious drivers of how we live.
 
If we are afraid of emotions then it logically follows that we are afraid of empathy too.
 
Fear emotions
 
Given that people are emotional one would think that understanding empathy would be a key requirement to understand other people. However, I have noticed that a number of researchers and writers aren’t comfortable with the word empathy to the point that they are critical of it. Sure, they support compassion because it is about solutions, but empathy is about those pesky emotions and feelings. The question I have: Is empathy all that "evil" to begin with?
 
So we’re all aligned, let’s define what empathy is:
Empathy: The ability to understand and share the feelings of another. 
Many researchers will define empathy as sharing feelings more than understanding feelings. At least, that is what Paul Bloom is proposing. I need to read more of his book, Against Empathy: the Case for Rational Compassion, to better understand his arguments, but after the first few pages I'm already challenged by his case. 
 
My challenge centers around how he defines empathy as the sharing of feelings more than the understanding of feelings. 
 
What are the challenges?
To start, you can't really share feelings and emotions. Those are unique experiences. You can never 100% know what someone else is thinking or feeling – it just isn't possible. Even an "empath" can only experience what they feel from someone else, and even then, it is a second hand experience with an understanding of those feelings based on that person's own past experiences. There is no way to get a unique understanding of what someone else is going through at any time.
 
You can imagine what someone is feeling or experiencing emotionally, but it's all hypothetical without a shared experience. When you imagine what someone else is thinking or feeling, you are basing it off of your personal experiences, which may or may not have any similiarities of what’s happening to the other person. You need a common ground to work from – a shared experience to discuss.
 
This is why we need to revisit the definition of empathy and focus on the part that is about understanding someone else’s emotions so you can relate to them.
 
If you have had an experience that shares some similarities to someone else’s, then there is a strong possibility that you could better understand what that person is experiencing. What are some examples?
  • We flinch when we see pain because we have all had a cut or other injury of varying degrees. We know what a cut feels like. Looking at the severity of a cut, we can magnify or downplay our own experience with it. 
  • We cry when we watch a movie where someone loses a child or spouse because we imagine what we would feel like if we lost someone very close to us. Most of us have in some way, which makes the emotional expression more powerful. However, if a child doesn't have a spouse he or she cannot relate and probably won't cry. 
  • Women don’t really have any idea how a man feels when someone whacks him in the testicles. There can be no frame of reference. It looks painful, but is it? This is why women don’t really flinch when they see that onscreen or in real life.
You need a frame of reference – a shared experience – to be able to communicate how you are feeling and thinking. 
 
In one of the empathy criticizer articles, Mr. Bloom shares an example of  a spouse trying to comfort the other after losing a job. He said that you don't want two very emotional people – just one and the other providing comfort, and the other didn't have to really "get" the experience to provide that comfort. That story didn't do it for me. I have been laid off and a close friend who had no experience with losing a job tried his best to comfort me and have compassion. Needless to say, he tried hard, but had no understanding of what I was feeling or experiencing. Further, he could barely imagine what it was like because he had no experiential frame of reference.
 
What's an experiential frame of reference? 

It's either experiencing the same event or having a parallel experience that has shared qualities. In the case of a layoff, this would be events where someone is exiled from a group for no apparent logical reason. That person did nothing wrong – and most likely, there is no known reason for the exile. So in this case, experiential frames of references could be:
  • Being asked to leave a group for some reason beyond your control but not hearing that reason
  • Family not talking to you because of something heard through the grapevine that isn't true and not sharing that information with you
  • Not being invited to a party that all of your friends were invited to – and you don't know why
When I got laid off, friends who had experienced a layoff were empathetic and helpful. The friends who never experienced a layoff were difficult. They tried their best and shared some nice sentiments, but their efforts simply didn't support me and made me more aware of the job loss. I had to part ways with some friends because there was no shared experience of no job lead in sight – they didn't understand my stress. They just didn't have a similar frame of reference to understand. To show empathy or compassion you need to have a connection with the other person. And the only way to truly understand emotions is to have a shared experience. 
 
I think what gets lost with empathy is people believing its all about having those pesky emotions and feelings. However, empathy really is more about understanding the emotion. And you can’t understand the experience someone is having if you haven’t had some level of the experience yourself. It's not really the emotion – it is the experience that is prompting the emotional response.
 
Maybe if we tweaked the definition of empathy to fit an understanding of the emotions experience and base this connection with someone else on having a shared experience it wold work better for those who value rational thinking. Then, maybe, we'd all be less critical of empathy and understand it's value.
 
For more information, take a look at Empathy Exercises or read about why people like Monopoly and other simulation games.
Why are we afraid of empathy?