Why is Customer Centricity struggling to reach the mainstream?

The concept of customer centricity is prominent in the blogosphere, e-articles and some professional magazines. It brings renewed energy to the customer being at the centre of any organisation.  Yet, customer centricity is struggling to establish itself in the mainstream business knowledgebase.

This is illustrated by a keyword search using Google Scholar. Comparing hits for customer centricity and customer service (in title) is shown the table below:

Date Range	Customer Centricity	Customer Service
1990-2000	52	3020
2001-2005	140	1800
2006-2011	191	2360

This clearly shows the dominance of discussion and research related to customer service.

Why is customer centricity finding it difficult to become established?

A review of 30 randomly selected abstracts and introductory chapters provided some insight. Using Google scholar, 15 texts were selected from customer centricity and customer service searches.

Bringing together a composite of ideas, customer centricity aims to create a customer focus. It puts customer related concepts together in novel and interesting ways, opening up new possibilities for embedding customer focus.

However, the concepts and terminology used in both fields is similar. Taking away the titles, a reader from a customer service stance would understand customer centric concepts, and vice versa. This Lack of differentiation and newness is hindering customer centricity’s acceptance. Customer centricity appears to be adding nothing new to academic concepts and knowledge. It does not have the strong foundations of customer service, and is building upon these foundations rather than expanding them or laying new ones. Establishing credible, non-derivative foundations for customer centricity is proving a challenge.

Nonetheless, customer centricity is battling on, gaining ground based on practical successes. Irrespective of academic indifference, the concept is proving to have something to offer businesses in their efforts to change and increase efficiency. The underpinning propositions of customer centricity make sense to management. Able to absorb varied approaches to organisational transformation, and put the customer first, has great appeal. Not having the drag of strong academic debates and ideals enables adaptation to capitalise on a variety of established methodologies and best practice. Customer centricity benefits from relatively unrestricted synergy.

The validity of customer centricity and its potential to aid performance and profitability is down to the views and beliefs of managers. Its similarities with customer service mean it is no less likely to fail than some form of customer service initiative. However, devotees of customer centricity would argue that the adaptive and composite nature enhances the potential for business improvement over customer service Initiatives.

Related articles

• More Companies Are Deigning Customer-Centric Business Strategies, But Then What…? (customerthink.com)

Faking Customer Centricity: is it the normal state of affairs

Can You Fake a Customer-Centric Orientation? Maz Iqbal asked this interesting question and comes to the conclusion that you can’t fake a customer-centric orientation. He asserts that having a customer-centric approach has the same emotional engagement and responses as those in a mother for the safely of her child. This level of engagement is necessary for customer-centricity to thrive. Maz also contends that people who do not have such deep engagement are riding on the back of customer-centricity, motivated by their personal goals.

Indeed, to be truly customer centric, an organisation needs to have the customer at the heart of its culture, at the heart of its thinking. The aim of such a culture is to have all individuals unconsciously referencing every action they take to the customer, and meeting their needs. Continually meeting customer needs is the aim, and if achieved, will mean the success of the organisation. The customer must take on an iconic status to which all must wholeheartedly revere. This will develop a high degree of trust and protectionism in the culture (Erdem & Ozen 2003).

Should an organisation have the emotional engagement and culture indicated by Maz, the impact of not meeting customer needs would be ghastly; it would be negative for both the organisation and individual. All employees would obsess about meeting customer needs, as not doing so would have a similar psychological impact as hurting a child. If the potential for causing such hurt in an individual were endemic in an organisation, peoples natural defences would be triggered. They would initiate safety behaviours and take all steps to minimise any risk. As parents know, this process of risk management with children drains physical and emotional energy. It may not be long before the organisation becomes overly risk averse and the employees drained of energy. Therefore, defining customer centricity as emotional engagement in this way is not viable. If such engagement does not occur then employees must engage with customer centricity differently.

People instinctively have multiple goals in the lives. They are not completely focussed on one particular objective; they may have one big goal but there will be many smaller ones alongside. To function effectively and distribute energy in their lives, individuals will have to continually evaluate what is important to achieve and fundamental to their very being. Customer centricity forms one of these goals but it is unlikely to form an individual’s life goal. Customer centricity is a goal residing within the context of an organisation, and therefore, is subsumed within an individuals working life goals. People are aware of the actions and behaviours that will support achievement of their goals. They are aware that a successful organisation will provide them with the resources to achieve their own goals. If the two are misaligned then there will be a parting of the ways.

Individuals buy-in to customer centricity as part of the organisational culture. Their buy-in allows them to work towards the organisations and their own goals. However, an individuals fundamental belief system and emotional engagement to customer centricity will not be as deeply rooted as caring for a child. The adaptive nature of the human psyche allows them to behave in a way that demonstrates such engagement with customer centricity, but it can be considered a performance.

Such a performance is not inauthentic. Individuals will believe that their performance will support the organisations and their own goals. The strength of this belief will vary over time and within different organisations.

In one sense it is not only possible to fake customer centricity, but it is the norm. Employees recognise what management want in terms of the notion of customer centricity and deliver through their actions and behaviour. These behaviours are not generated from a deep emotional engagement with the customer but from their own life goals. However, this faking, the customer centric performance, is founded on beliefs and values associated with the organisations success; if the organisation is unsuccessful, an individual’s goals may follow suit. In accepting customer centricity as a goal within the organisation, individuals are not faking their commitment.

To expect an individual to commit their whole being and emotional life to a customer centric orientation is unreasonable. Accepting that cultures associated with customer centricity are mere performances opens up new opportunities. Employing different writers and choreographers will allow the performance to adapt and improve. Accepting performers are all different, performing best on different stages, may give customer centricity a healthy injection of alternative perspectives.

References:

Erdem, F. & Ozen, J. 2003, ‘Cognitive and affective dimensions of trust in developing team performance’, Team Performance Management

Can You Fake a Customer-Centric Orientation? Maz Iqbal

Customer Centric or Business Centric; is it really a choice?

Organisations can be described in a number of ways including being customer or business centric. These two qualities are defined below:

A customer centric organization focuses on meeting customer’s needs. Such an organisation will aim to have strong marketing and research functions[1]. A business centric organization focuses on maximising value for shareholders and profitability and will focus on operations and sales.[1]

Organisations such as Microsoft and Apple are often presented as businesses that thrive wholly on innovation, thus are deeply customer centric. On the other hand, Public organisations are presented as business centric aiming to deliver quality and value to the community.

Business and customer centricity are often presented in terms of either/or; that is, an organisation is one or the other. If the focus and strengths of an organisation lie in customer centricity their survival may prove very difficult. They may excel at marking and sales, but this is not enough. If the organisation is to preserve profitability, it must have a level of operational excellence underpinning sales. Also needed is business centricity, for example, fulfilling orders in the most efficient way is a key success factor. Without effective fulfilment, customer needs will not be met due to poor quality, long delivery times etc. Conversely, an organisation which has operational excellence will not last long if they don’t have the right products or services to sell.

This separation of business and customer centricity is countenanced by the many articles and books that specifically address each topic; a quick Google search will reveal that they tend to be addressed as completely separate topics. In the real world of management practice, the two should not be divided. They may be separated in terms of knowledge, tools and techniques relating to each topic. Both business and customer centricity have their own theoretical foundations, tools and techniques. Considering them as separate issues may be necessary for the practical delivery of improvements using relevant tools and techniques. However, management must keep an aggregate perspective, allowing the organisation to maintain balanced functional improvement. Management must strive to achieve a balance in overall functioning for the organisation to remain effective; the company must be both customer and business centric. Without such a balance, the organisations viability may be threatened.

To maintain continuous improvement an organisation may cycle through business and customer centric tools and techniques; this will allow the most useful approaches and ideas to be adopted. Such development activities should be undertaken within an overarching framework where business and customer centricity are considered together.

 

1. http://www.linkedin.com/answers/management/organizational-development/MGM_ODV/664471-30261347