Customer intimacy defined

How does one distinguish between the tendency to become intimate with the customer and so-called customer intimacy?

Let us draw from the experience of a student-entrepreneur who tested his learnings in a construction project which he delivered and completed within the promised 30-day period last March 2003. Having successfully met this deadline was an important accomplishment since it also meant the start of many projects that would have to be consistently delivered within a 30-day cycle.

Earlier on, this student-entrepreneur had intimated to his guru his deep concern over this particular project. It represented his biggest account. And, given the facts of the situation, he was quite sure that he would easily lose out to his competitor. Why?

Being his best friend, my competitor is very close to the owner/big customer whose office is virtually his own. My competitor is there everyday and acts as his constant companion on visits to the project sites and even after office hours. Since they are best friends, my competitor knows the weakness of the owner/big customer. He courts like a politician and treats the whole office to lunch or snacks and is a very popular fixture there.

After confirming his fear that his competitor clearly had an intimate relationship with the customer, the guru advised him to apply the customer intimacy lesson. The student-entrepreneur was asked to find out what his customer needed/wanted, i.e., What really mattered to the customer? How did the customer define quality, delivery and productivity or QDP needs?

Having allayed his fears, the student-entrepreneur proceeded to check on his customer and found out the following:

The customer defined quality as being able to finish the job per design specifications to the very last detail of the plans. But what was equally important was that the project must be done within 30 days. However, while each day of delay represented a great opportunity loss to the customer, the latter would not trade off quality for early delivery.

Once he validated the lessons on QDP management which he picked up in his Master in Entrepreneurship program, the student-entrepreneur offered the customer a 30-day delivery schedule without trading off quality. He made a promise he intended to keep. The customer’s response was straightforward: "If you can deliver within 30 days, I’ll give all my projects to you."

The student-entrepreneur took this as a challenge and proceeded to map out how to keep his promise. Applying ME lessons further, he broke down the project to activities and tasks. He did process-mapping. He used his talents to design the work in such a way that, as much as possible, the pre-fabricated work would be shop-based while the 30 days would be for assembly work done in the project site.

Needless to say, the student-entrepreneur met both the quality and delivery requirements of the customer. He also confirmed that the close relationship his competitor had with the customer was no match to his "customer-need-meeting" performance. These days, he has many 30-day contracts to deliver to the customer.

What is even more interesting is that he has not stopped becoming the best he can be. He is still finding ways to bring down the 30 days to an ever shorter period. Rather than hang around the customer’s office, he would rather spend his time looking for ways to advance the delivery date without trading off quality. The big customer is happy not to see him in his office, knowing full well that the student-entrepreneur is somewhere else trying to find ways to match quality with shorter delivery time. Evidently, the customer prefers to have someone like him than an omnipresent supplier who makes promises that could not be kept.

Today, the student-entrepreneur adopts customer intimacy versus the tack of being intimate with the customer. He uses more of his resources to understand and consistently deliver the customer’s QDP requirements rather than rely on public relations activities with the customer. He knows that building relationships with customers is a plus. It only becomes an advantage if and when the promises made are consistently met. Good PR will never make up for poor performance.

(Alejandrino Ferreria is the dean of the Asian Center for Entrepreneurship of the Asian Institute of Management. For further comments and inquiries, you may contact him at: [email protected]. Published "Entrepreneur’s Helpline" columns can be viewed on the AIM website at http//: www.aim.edu.ph).