The pursuit of marketplace victory is an emotionally chargedtopic. As the competition intensifies, so do the excitement and apprehension in those participating and watching. Top performers and winning teams evoke feelings of ecstasy and admiration in some, but agony and envy in others. Likewise, when the results of the battle over customers are tallied, some managers are electrified, while others are filled with dread.
Invariably, the managers most conflicted are those who had been within striking distance of winning, only to watch victory slip from their hands. They pursued strategies very similar to those employed by the leaders, but not with the same results. In fact, most of what this articles addresses would apply to them—if only they could notch up their performances.
“What’s missing?” they ask in frustration. “We do everything our toughest competitors do, if not more. It isn’t possible to work harder than we do, and still, we aren’t breaking through.” Adding insult to injury, Wall Street and the business press ignore their not insignificant accomplishments, charmed instead by flashier performers and upstarts despite the fact that these companies are yet to see a profit. As the “almost winning” managers will attest, there’s an elusive quality surrounding market leadership that deserves further comment in this final article.
DODO Marketing Blog
To understand more clearly that fine but critical line between near victory and victory, I discussed the issue with numerous executives who had experienced both sides of it. As diverse as their viewpoints are, they concur that establishing a market presence, boldness, capitalizing on customers’ shifting priorities, and a healthy dose of fearlessness determine the battle for customers. But, they add emphatically, ultimately what gives them the edge—especially when they’re in a close contest on an even playing field—is their motivation and method. Permeating the core of each employee as well as the general environment of the organization with the shared ambition and unflagging determination to win in the marketplace is how they describe motivation. Method requires identifying which approach or process works best for the organization, then building momentum by systematically and relentlessly improving upon it—practice, practice, and practice.
Certainly, I do not disagree: Their directives echo those laid out in The Discipline of Market Leaders as well as in numerous other articles and articles on the topic. Though not revolutionary, they are easily overlooked in the heat of the race. For the purpose of illustration, let’s consider how three different managers respond to the successes .of others. Their reactions offer clues and reminders of what is missing from their quests for success.
First, think about managers who love to hear memorable stories about the exploits of top performers. They are motivated by the market leaders’ bold and imaginative activities, especially when the winners start out against the odds. At the same time, hearing about the leaders induces anxiety and makes them acutely aware of the dangers inherent in falling behind. The resulting ambivalence of inspiration and fear creates a sense of urgency. They feel impatient to initiate some sort of action even
though its details have not yet been refined and their troops are not yet prepared.
In market-leading companies populated with like-minded folks, these calls to action find a receptive audience and serve to invigorate the business. Even when directions are sketchy— possibly because they are not set in stone, thus leaving room for exploration—these organizations find a way to convert that sketchiness to their advantage. Many have been in this position before; and if not, they’re confident, and usually justifiably so, that they will find a way to make the plan work.
Similar calls to action may resonate less well in companies that are lagging in their fields. There, the employees can be leery of undertaking the manager’s biddings because, at least in part, the word “challenge” connotes more work. Unconvinced that the extra effort will matter, they don’t share the boss’s resolve, exuberance, and optimism. Cajoled or coerced into action, they cooperate, butfail to exert themselves. Only staring disaster in the face mobilizes them to scramble, but by then it is usually too late.
What is missing is a common sense of urgency (felt in time to matter) and a reliable road map. Lacking in these companies are clear goals and a well-practiced, organized method of tackling issues. Managers can’t articulate an inspiring course to their employees if they don’t have one, and many companies (that is, people) are not good at making it up as they go along.
