Does success lead to happiness? According to Shawn Achor, Harvard professor and author of  The Happiness
Advantage, the answer is “not really.” I heard him speak recently and his findings indicate that only 10% of a person’s happiness can be predicted by external factors, such as success. The other 90% is based on the lens through which you view your world. If you can answer “yes” to the following three questions you are most likely a happy person:

1. Do you believe that your behavior matters?
2. Do you have a positive social support network?
3. Do you view stress as a challenge?

His findings also indicate that the inverse of the opening statement is true: Happiness leads to success. Without going into the science behind his findings, the correlation between happiness (and the associated positive frame of mind) and success is found in sport, arts and business. And the mind can be retrained in a few months to be happier. He suggests five habits that can permanently alter a person’s “lens” and therefore their happiness and their success.

1. Every day, articulate three things for which you are grateful and why. Make a different list every day. Write them down or share them with someone else.
2. Write in a journal about your most meaningful experience of the day.
3. Exercise for 15 minutes every day in a way that is fun and energetic.
4. Take two minutes each day to stop “doing” and be “quiet.” Just breathe and quit thinking. Some call this meditation, but Achor’s not hung up on technique, just on pausing the hyperactive, over-stimulated mind for a moment.
5. Practice one act of kindness each day. The gestures can be simple things like writing a thank you note, buying someone a cup of coffee or visiting a co-worker’s office to let them know how much you appreciate something they did.

Start with one habit every two weeks and then add another. This process has had more positive impacts on curing depression than medications. And it can transform an office environment in a short period of time.

So what does this have to do with being a marketing leader? If your success is dependent on other people you’ll be much better off if they are happy people. And you can help them become happier people by how you lead them.

Watch the attached video and try some new habits, then let me know what happens. I hope it makes you happy.

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

Why Happiness Leads to Success

In the Web 2.0 world, customer experience is the key differentiator between leaders and laggards. While the importance of delivering great experiences for customers is generally understood by most companies, executing well across all customer touch points is a challenge for most. Over the next few month, I’ll be collaborating with Grant Johnson, Chief Marketing Officer of Pegasystems, the leader in Business Process Management (BPM) and software for customer centricity, to facilitate discussions on this topic and explore:

• The role of the CMO in designing and managing desired experiences across all customer touch points and organizational silos
• How companies are addressing this critical issue and some worthy lessons learned
• How technology helps deliver more predictable and profitable customer experiences

Our first events will be in the Washington D.C. area on March 20 (CMO Club event page) and Philadelphia on March 21(CMO Club event page). If you are a marketing leader in either area, please join us for the conversation.

For those of you who can’t make it, I’d welcome your feedback by taking a short survey (about 5 minutes). Just click on this link: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/Customer_Experiences. The findings of our research with be made available after PegaWorld in June.

In the meantime,  I will periodically post some of our early insights here for your review and comment.

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

The Role of CMO in Designing Customer Experiences

These were the words that closed the Declaration of Independence and set into motion the most remarkable experiment in government. I love the Fourth of July because it is a reminder that when people commit themselves to change the course of human events, anything is possible!

As a marketing leader, are you displaying the courage of our forefathers to break with the status quo and lead the change your organization needs? Has your team mutually pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to the cause you are championing? This might be a good weekend to reflect and find some inspiration from Hancock, Jefferson, Franklin and others. With mutual commitment to a worthy cause, anything is possible!

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

“We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

Jim Stengel, the former CMO of Procter & Gamble, is one of the most respected marketing executives in the world and, after talking with him recently about the role of a marketing leader as a change agent, I now understand why. Following are a few highlights from our discussion.

What is the biggest issue new marketing leaders must address in order to be successful?

The biggest issue that marketing leaders have is the job is not well defined. I think that’s one of the reasons we have the great churn we have. I think a lot of CEOs don’t know what success looks like. They bring in a CMO without a clear idea of what the job design is, what the scope is, what the core work is, what the capabilities are that they want the CMO to build.

When CMOs hit the ground, all kinds of stuff gets thrown at them. They don’t quite know how to take a pause and define their scope and get ahead of it. I think that’s the biggest issue. Basically it is clarity on job design. Marketing is sort of a different thing to every company. That’s unlike Finance or Human Resources or Operations, which have relatively common standards.

Does that lead to unrealistic expectations from the CEO about how quickly a new CMO can make an impact?

In most other functions CEOs wouldn’t expect as quick a fix as they expect in marketing. I think if someone comes in as chief technology officer, and if it’s a mess in the company, the CEO understands. You’ve got to hire people. You’ve got to develop your platform. You’ve got to build some software capabilities, whatever it might be. That’s going to take ramp-up. I think in marketing, they sort of just expect it will happen, that it will be easy.

But the same things are true in marketing: You’ve got to get the right people. You’ve got to get the right strategy. You’ve got to get the right infrastructure. You’ve got to get the right relationships. I think what so many people don’t see is that marketing is strategy. It’s hard for me to tell you about a great company that is highly successful where marketing isn’t all about strategy.

I think that companies that are struggling a lot don’t have marketing or don’t have a marketing lens through which they look at strategy. Strategies are either owned by a strategy function or Finance. I think this is one of the reasons Procter has been successful for many, many, many decades. At that place, the work of marketing is well defined, well understood and it’s all about strategy. It’s all about accountability. It’s all about results. And it’s all about the customer and the consumer.

What do you think are the key ingredients for a successful strategy?

It’s certainly one that has clarity. It’s one that is forward-looking. It’s one that is choice-ful. It’s one that derives competitive advantage and it’s one that results in a value proposition to the customer that is better than your competition.

Why do you think companies have such a hard time articulating a winning strategy?

I think, John, it’s because it’s very thoughtful work. It’s very whole-brained. It’s very tough. It demands extraordinary leadership at the top and constancy of purpose, and the willingness to change things. That’s really hard work. I think that it’s a rare leader who can pull that off.

For a marketing leader to be an effective change agent for his or her company, what do you think are the key ingredients?

What a great marketing leader has to do is constantly paint scenarios or make the case for change. People are not just going to change. You won’t get their hearts and their minds unless they are extremely restless and uncomfortable with the status quo.

I think a huge job of a marketing leader is to be that data-based, dramatic, storyteller who gets people uncomfortable with where they are and thinking about where they need to go.

I did a lot of that work at P&G. It was hardest when we were successful. But I spent an awful lot of my time gathering data, painting scenarios, visiting people. I never started a conversation with a business leader or my CEO or my CFO or whoever, with a, “Here’s what I think we should do…”  Or, “Here’s what we must do.”

I would always start with, “Let me share with you some data about where we are today and where things are going.” It’s non-threatening. But the whole point of that is to get people saying, “Oh, my God. How do we address this and how do we address this urgently?”

When you get that kind of reaction, you unlock the passion of people in the right direction and amazing things happen. I think you have it easier when you’re on a burning platform but when you don’t have a burning platform, you have to create it.

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

What Jim Stengel, former P&G CMO, learned about leading change

res·o·lu·tion - a resolve or determination: to make a firm resolution to do something

I was given a book for Christmas by my son that got me thinking about this topic. The Path Between the Seas by David McCullough is the story of the building of the Panama Canal. I learned several things I did not know, including the role of Ferdinand de Lesseps, the builder of the Suez Canal.

Mr. de Lesseps was determined to repeat his historic feat by linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans with a sea-level canal, the same approach he had taken in the Middle East. During his first endeavor, he overcame significant obstacles through will power and never-ending optimism. He “resolved” not to fail and his commitment to eventual success encouraged others to invent new ways of overcoming the challenges. His faith in himself and the possibility of others was resolute.

Unfortunately, these sames qualities were his downfall in Panama. He was determined to build a canal without locks, despite the enormous, some would say insurmountable, obstacles to that strategy. In the end, his attempt to build the Panama Canal failed, not because he lacked resolve, but because he held steadfast to a strategy that had worked for him once before and he was determined it would again. Eventually, an American approach to the Canal would succeed because of both a sound strategy and strong resolve.

So as we all make our New Year Resolutions for ourselves and our organizations, let’s ask ourselves if we have a strategy that is appropriate for the current conditions. Are our resolutions a “wish list” or a determination backed by a sound strategy? At our agency we have resolved to accelerate our growth after three years of a challenging economy. We’re not counting on economic resurgence to propel us forward, but a commitment to an evolved strategic approach. And the determination of a great team of people.

What have you resolved to do in the new year? We’d love to encourage you.

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

Why your “resolution” will probably fail!

Charlie Lawrence, General Manager, Franke Kitchen Systems

According to Charlie Lawrence, General Manager  of  Franke Kitchen Systems Luxury Products Group, it should be the CMO. I had the opportunity to meet Charlie at the recent CMO Council Summit last week where he talked about the unique position of a marketing leader to align the culture and brand DNA of a company. We also had a follow-up conversation this week on the subject where he reiterated the success that can come from having a shared vision that aligns employees and customers.

According to Charlie, as he shares on his blog, “Traditionally marketing is defined in terms of the 4 Ps that we are all taught in marketing 101 in undergraduate school. This is still true today but I contend that this external perspective is only half of the job of today’s CMO. Yes consumer insight, competitor foresight and external forces vision are all critical to create the ideal marketing mix to win in the marketplace but…

…If the internal aspects of the CMO’s job are ignored or not treated seriously all of the good work on external aspects of the CMO’s efforts will be wasted. If there is not a shared vision and company culture that is consistent with the marketing program this will lead to execution failure that could ultimately damage the brand/company.”

Are you a champion of the company’s vision to your internal constituents? What have you done that was successful in aligning your employees with your brand DNA? Let us know what’s worked.

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

Who should be connecting your culture and brand DNA?

I was able to sit down with Samsung’s new CMO, Ralph Santana, a few weeks ago to hear his insights on getting off to a fast start as a new marketing leader. He discussed his focus on building the Samsung brand and making it more relevant. He also shared his perspective on brand relevancy at a recent conference of the Association of National Advertisers. Here is Ralph addressing the ANA.

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

What is a culturally relevant brand? Samsung’s new CMO has some thoughts.

I had a great conversation today with one of our agency leaders about what it takes to build a culture of collaboration. We were discussing how people often get defensive about their ideas and have a difficult time hearing others’ perspectives. They take the criticism as a personal attack (ego) instead of a critique of their idea. Granted, some people when providing feedback can be brutally honest and their intentions can be misconstrued. Yet great cultures are ones that value candid discussions and honest feedback. Ones where team members push each other to be better. And ones where taking the risk to share new ideas is encouraged not stifled. Pixar came up as an example of a company that gets this.

The Guardian recently wrote about the Pixar culture and had this to say.

Ask any Pixar employee and they’ll refute the suggestion that they can’t make bad films. “We make bad films all the time,” counters Bobby Podesta, one of Toy Story 3′s supervising animators, who has been at Pixar since 1997. “Almost every film of ours has been a horrible film at some point, but we’re very good about being honest with each other and saying, ‘This is horrible. Here are some ways to make it better.’”

The company’s brutal self-review process demands that thin-skinned animators need not apply, says fellow supervising animator Mike Venturini. “Through the interview process, we’ll decide if [prospective employees] are fit for the rigours of working at Pixar. But it takes time for animators that have worked at other studios to let their guard down and understand that when they’re given feedback it’s done in a non-judgmental, supportive way.”

Great marketing organizations must encourage those who are dissatisfied with the status quo to take the initiative to do something about it. Without marketers who can generate new ideas companies will either miss opportunities or fail to evolving in changing markets. And marketers must display the attribute of courage if they are going to maximize their contributions to their organizations.

Have you been a part of an organization that did this well? What was it like and what behaviors made such a culture possible?

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

How can you separate your “ego” from your “ideas?” Pixar may have an answer.

I read two posts last week that got me thinking about superheroes and sidekicks. One was by Rob Enderle entitled  HP’s Hurd, Dunn and Fiorina Could Learn from Superheroes. The other was on AdAge.com by Jack Neff entitled Meet the New and Evolved CMO Rock Stars.

As I’ve been interviewing CMOs for my upcoming book, I’ve met some very talented leaders who go about their roles in very different ways. Some view their roles as supporting their CEOs and bringing about the vision that their bosses have set forth. Others are the lead change agents for their brands and find themselves (comfortably) in the spotlight as they share their plans.

So my question for you is, should CMOs be Batman or Robin? Or is there a better tandem to use as a model for CEO/CMO partnering?

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

Should CMOs be Batman or Robin?

I had a great conversation this week with Colin Buechler, Senior VP of Sales and Marketing at Lifesize, a fast-growing video conferencing company, about improving collaboration between the sales organization and the marketing organization. Colin recently added the sales responsibility to his role after guiding the marketing function over the past several years. He has encouraged his team to drop the term “ownership” and replace it with “accountability.” His insight is applicable to the relationships between any two groups or individuals, not just sales and marketing.

Let’s look at these two words according to the Random House Dictionary:

Ownership 1. the state or fact of being an owner 2. legal right of possession; proprietorship

Accountability 1. the state of being accountable, liable or answerable

There is a lot of talk in business journals about getting employees to “take ownership.” The problem with that terminology is it implies I own something and you don’t. This is often used in the context of defining roles and responsibilities. With employment anxiety, owning something is felt to be justification for job security and therefore validates the continued need for a person’s role. It is also used to “keep people off my turf” and conveys an attitude of “I don’t need you.” It leads to extended and contentious conversations that are often unproductive and trust diminishing.

Accountability, on the hand, implies responsibility but not independent authority. It clearly communicates that you have an important role to play and that you take it seriously. It also leaves open the possibilities that you can work with others to achieve the goals for which you are accountable. Stephen Covey says, “accountability breeds response-ability.”

Language is an important tool for building collaborative relationships. If your team is struggling with this issue, try shifting the terminology to accountability from ownership and see if it helps you as it has Colin.

This is a post from Marketing Has Changed by John Ellett. Subscribe to my feed.

Why the difference between “ownership” and “accountability” can be huge