Our
firm usually at least made the shortlist whenever we submitted a proposal to
this federal agency. So when four straight proposals fell short, we suspected
something was amiss. I called the contracting officer to find out what was
wrong.
"We've
been throwing your proposals in the trash," he said (probably an
exaggeration, but he made his point!). He then explained that during
construction of the high-tech training facility we had designed, there were
problems with the electromagnetic shielding material we had specified,
resulting in a significant delay and increase in cost.
The
problem caught us completely by surprise. Our project manager had talked with
the contracting officer a couple of times during construction and was not
informed of any substantial issues. This was my first exposure to the risk of
leaving communications with a key client totally in the hands of the PM.
Not
that our PM really did anything wrong. He had asked how things were going and was not
told the truth. I've seen the same basic scenario many times since. The issue
is that many clients will not voice their dissatisfaction to PMs or other key
project team members, who may be viewed as part of the problem.
Research
suggests that 50-90% of unhappy customers don't complain to the product or
service provider. They simply take their business elsewhere. One study specific to the
legal profession found that 44% of clients don't voice their
unhappiness, compared to only 27% who fail to complain in the services sector
at large. Why the difference? I suspect the personal nature of professional
services is a big factor.
That's
why I advocate assigning every key client relationship what I call a client
advocate (many firms use the designation of client service manager). Preferably
this is someone who is not directly involved in the project work (except
potentially in an advisory or oversight role). Otherwise they lose some of the
objectivity and independence needed to function effectively as client advocate.
This person's responsibilities typically include:
- Confirms client satisfaction. Keeps
in touch with the client from time to time (as mutually agreed upon), checking to see
that the client remains fully satisfied with the firm's performance. This
feedback can be elicited in a variety of ways, usually through periodic
conversations or a formal questionnaire—ideally a combination of both.
- Leads the follow-up to specific client complaints. When the client voices a
concern or suggestion, the client advocate ensures that the firm properly and promptly responds.
- Monitors overall responsiveness during project performance. Acts as an in-house advocate
for the client, seeing that the firm is fully responsive to client needs
and expectations during the project. May coordinate periodic third-party project reviews to
this end.
- Acts as third-party
liaison. Serves
as the primary point of contact when the client has a problem or concern
that he or she prefers not to take directly to the PM. I assumed this role
by default in the example above—albeit too late to avoid losing some
business with the client.
Over
the years, I've witnessed many situations where clients were willing to speak
more openly about concerns when not personally addressing the PM or key project
team member. This includes when I've conducted client interviews as an outside
consultant.
Another
critical role that the client advocate plays is maintaining focus on the
client. PMs naturally get caught up in the details of executing the project,
sometimes with the unintended consequence of not giving enough attention to
clients. There is an inherent tension between client focus and project focus in
virtually any A/E firm (see my previous post on "project myopia"). Assigning a client advocate to
complement the PM can help ensure that you balance the two perspectives.
Who
should serve as client advocate? As you might suspect, this should be someone
who has the ability to get things done on behalf of the client. The project
principal is a logical candidate, depending on this person's level of
involvement in the project work. But this role doesn't necessarily require a
principal or senior manager (although your top clients probably warrant someone
at this level).
Another
critical role that the client advocate plays is maintaining post on "project myopia"). Assigning a client advocate to
complement the PM can help ensure that you balance the two perspectives.
Who
should serve as client advocate? As you might suspect, this should be someone
who has the ability to get things done on behalf of the client. The project
principal is a logical candidate, depending on this person's level of
involvement in the project work. But this role doesn't necessarily require a
principal or senior manager (although your top clients probably warrant someone
at this level).
I
served as client advocate for many years as an extension of my business
development role. My primary authority was the voice of the client. That, plus
my persuasive abilities and general management support, enabled me to be
effective in keeping clients happy and continuing to earn their business.
I
would urge you not to entrust critical client relationships to the PM alone, no
matter how competent that person may be. Give the client another avenue to
share concerns that doesn't require an uncomfortable conversation, not to
mention an individual not so caught up in the details of project execution that
the needs of the client can get neglected. Assigning a client advocate is a
simple step that can make a huge difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment