Discover the Talents of Each Employee

Excerpted from
Follow this Path: How the World's Greatest Organizations Drive Growth by Unleashing Human Potential
By Curt Coffman, Gabriel Gonzalez-Molina, Ph.D.

Mike Rose is great at what he does, and it shows. Leaning back in his chair, his feet resting on his desk, headphone in place, he inhabits his area-he refers to it as the "command center"-with ease. Relaying information and answering questions with an enthusiastic manner that is endlessly engaging to the people on the other end of the line, Mike enjoys his job. When speaking to customers, he exhibits what seems to be a magical ability to "read" them, even though he never sees them.

Information technology is Mike's field of operation. He interacts with established and potential customers, presenting new products and services to them. Providing technical support is another part of his work.

But for Mike, the very process of speaking to people, finding out their likes and dislikes, guiding them to the products and services that are right for them-that's what gets him psyched every morning:

I have the best time talking to people and figuring out what is or isn't important to them. When I make a connection, I hear it in their voices, and it makes me feel good.

When asked how he performs such sleight of hand-Mike has developed quite a reputation as Mike the Magician-he shrugs his shoulders:

Beats me. I get a big charge out of turning dissatisfied customers into people who want to stay with us. And my day is made when I bring a new customer in.

Mike's connect ion with the people he speaks to is emotional.

Tom Fault, who sits a couple of rows away from Mike, looks over at his colleague, tries to relax his tight shoulders, and sighs. He doesn't understand it; he and Mike put in the same training time. Me is as technically competent as Mike and longs to perform as well as he does. And he tries: Reminders of the basic customer tenets (these include active listening, communicating concern, paraphrasing the problem back, identifying the party at fault and the severity of the problem) are taped to his bulletin board. He mentally reviews the means of quickly assessing particular customer characteristics, grouping them in terms of their level of technical sophistication and specific needs, before each call. Then, of course, he knows the basic rules that everybody is supposed to follow:

• Always smile when you talk to customers, even if they can't see you.

• The customer is always right.

• Provide complete information; that's the way to fulfill a customer's expectations.

• Treat customers right.

So Tom has a tough time understanding why his intense preparations and fervent wish to succeed aren't working:

I try to sound friendly and courteous, just as I was taught to be. But for some reason I can't fathom, when I pick up the phone everything falls apart. I forget the client's name. Somehow I naturally arouse their frustration and anger. Basically, I lose the person as soon as I say hello. It's terribly demoralizing. I just don't get it Mike and I have been here the same number of years and he is bringing in new customers while I'm losing old ones.

Tom is not able to connect to customers emotionally.

Mike and Tom differ in a very crucial way. Mike has a natural talent for his work, which comes to him easily. He doesn't "sweat" it. Certainly he has been trained, so he has the skills he needs. But he brings something else, something that cannot be taught. When he connects with customers, he feels good. They, in turn, feel that he cares about them. Consequently, Mike's work keeps blooming into profits.

Tom, on the other hand, just doesn't have a natural predisposition for the job he wants to do well. This truth comes across subliminally to customers, who react badly to him. Tom's work is a fault line that shakes up the bottom line.

The longer Tom toils away at a job not suited to his particular talents, the more the customer base erodes. He just can't work to full capacity in the job he's in. Sadly, maybe he knows what he is really good at and doesn't think it counts (although realistically assessing Mike could make him re-think this point of view). Or perhaps he doesn't believe that he could ever have the opportunity to be at his best, so he muddles through at what he doesn't do particularly well.

In Tom's case an even bigger attempt to try to motivate customers could be undertaken. But if after years of trying, with every good intention, he's still not able to perform as well as Mike does, how realistic and how cost effective is it to try to remake him into something he isn't?

Phoning It In

Mike and Tom are real people. They are part of a workforce of millions who make their living through the phone. They are just two examples of the wide range of performance that exists in call centers all over the world. The influence that extends from each person picking up a phone and representing his company is nothing short of staggering.

Gallup's research shows that the most effective employees are powerful brand boosters, while the least effective force customers to seek solace with competitors. For instance, one large company, with multiple call centers, sees that its top 1 percent of performers create engagement among an amazing 88 percent of customers they talk to. The top-achieving 5 to 10 percent of employees also earn very respectable engagement numbers. The top seven employees, however, ace each conversation: They enhance engagement with every customer they speak to.

If you look at the same company's worst performance numbers, the results are equally dramatic-and a lot more troubling. Employees who reduce engagement by 14 percent after speaking to customers are considered the bottom 10 percent. They destroy more loyalty than they create. After them, the bottom 5 percent-employing rudeness, insensitivity, and the consistent inability to solve problems-cause engagement to plunge even more. The three worst employees are in a class unto themselves. They manage to eradicate customer allegiance completely.

What could account for this kind of dramatic discrepancy within one company?

Gallup asked millions of employees in sixty-six countries this question: "Do you get the chance to do what you do best at work every day?" The answers were sobering and eye-opening. Only one in five-a mere 20 percent-said yes. Think of it this way. Imagine a bank where twenty of its one hundred branches are open for business when they need to. Or an automobile manufacturer that makes millions of cars, but only 20 percent of them steer properly. Consider what would happen to a utility company if only 20 percent of its customers paid their bills.

The stunning reality is that most organizations see superior results from only 20 percent of their employees. In an attempt to fix the other 80 percent, they take a detour that keeps them in mediocreland.