I recently discussed Google’s response to the service demands on its new Android phone. Google has prided itself on excellence, but has come up short with the Android offering, where hands-on service is a critical part of getting it right. As I wrote in that post, the phone needs a different kind of customer interaction than Google is used to delivering. If Google continues to rely on its standard service model, it will continue to struggle.
There was an interesting parallel in the NYT’s recent description of IBM’s turnaround, which has been fueled by its pivot to high-end services. Why has IBM succeeded where others have stumbled? In part, it’s because IBM didn’t underestimate the challenge. IBM managers realized how much change was required to play and win the services game. That may sound simple, but the emotional barriers to service excellence can be enormous. Said differently, acknowledging that you can’t deliver great service without some serious soul-searching can be as important as whatever happens next.
What did IBM do differently? The short answer is everything. The longer answer is that it took service seriously. And then changed its products, pricing, processes, human resources, and customer interaction. For example, instead of designing a product that it then sold into organizations, it learned how to uncover a client’s problem and develop solutions to that problem. Fortunately for IBM, many of its clients had similar problems, which has permitted standardization across solutions.
IBM gets 80% of its revenues from services. Just a few years ago it was 50%, and not too long before that, services were essentially a hobby for the company. IBM has demonstrated that it’s possible for a product company to play the service game, but pulling it off requires new attitudes about customer needs — and a deep humility about the road ahead. When that kind of humility meets those kinds of attitudes, the outcome is happy customers. And when you throw standardization into the mix, now you have a service business.