Skip the Form Letters, They Are Missed Opportunities

Recently I wrote an article about how Whitman's candies lost me as a loyal customer due to misleading packaging. They put 12 pieces of candy in a box that could have held 30 pieces. The weight on the label was the only indication of the sneaky packaging. While I wrote the blog article, my wife send a complaint letter to Russell Stover who made the box.

Today, we received a response from Russell Stover. Unfortunately, they missed the opportunity to win us back. Instead of an acknowledgement of the problem we got a form letter explaining that the "box was filled by weight and not by volume," and how the "net weight must comply with all Federal and State regulations." I won't share the whole letter here out of respect for the confidentiality statement they appended. I'm sure such things are not legally enforceable, but I see no compelling need to go against their request.

How should a leader respond to such a customer complaint? Russell Stover was stuck between not wanting to admit wrongdoing and knowing that such packaging is misleading. Rather than defensively explaining how their customer didn't understand their correct actions, a leader can fall back on the truth, even if it isn't a confession of guilt. In this case perhaps, "We understand how you could have felt deceived by our packaging choice. We will convey your concerns to our management. We hope we can better serve you with our products in the future." These are all things that are true and affirming. We would have preferred, "We shouldn't have done that."

Ill Will From Misleading Packaging

Every year when I was a kid I got a four-piece Whitman's sampler in my Christmas stocking. I've always had a warm place in my heart for Whitman's candies. So I was excited when a friend brought us this large box of Whitman Reserve chocolates. Tonight we opened it and excitement turned to disappointment and disgust. The 2½-inch box had a single 1-inch layer of chocolates in it. Instead of a second layer, it had a false bottom. My daughters said it was "cheap".

I've come to expect the typical packaging tricks. Each of the 12 pieces of chocolate was nestled in its own protective plastic form. The plastic separated each piece by about ¾ inch. That makes up 43% package spacing on the long side and 48% package spacing on the short side. Protecting the bottom of each piece of candy is a packaging buffer of ¼ inch, in addition to the 1-inch false bottom. It's a shame that these kinds of tricks don't surprise me any more.

I looked forward to that beautiful, big box of "Reserve" chocolates. From its size, I expected the box to have two to three dozen premium chocolates. Seeing my beloved Whitman's dream squashed by a meager single layer changed my opinion of the brand.

The box was labeled to contain 7oz., but I have no doubt that the package design is intended to make me believe it contains much more. But what customers like me will take away from this kind of packaging is that the brand I used to value is a brand that is trying to mislead me. That's not a brand I can trust.

It's a shame really; the chocolates were good. I can't be the only faithful customer they have lost with this poor decision. When making cost-saving decisions for your own company, look for ways that don't make your customers feel deceived.

Engineering Camp for Girls

I wish this wasn't necessary, but it is:  GADgET (Girls Adventuring in Design Engineering & Technology).  As an engineering manager and a father of two daughters, I find it appalling that there are so few women in engineering.  Kudos to the GADgET folks for their leadership in changing this.

Selfishness a Good Career Move

What should we do with this news? This article on ScienceDaily makes sense, but I still find it curious: Do-Gooders Get Voted Off Island First: People Don't Really Like Unselfish Colleagues, Psychologists Find.

I would be curious if the results are different when teams are engaged in group success. That would be a more enjoyable group to work with.

PowerPoint is Not the Presentation

I can think of no more practical leadership topic than the use of PowerPoint. This New York Times article about the negative results of the use of PowerPoint by the US military paints a clear picture.

It's easy to be fooled into thinking that your PowerPoint slide deck is your presentation. People say things like, "I can't make the meeting. Please send me your presentation." This causes people to think they have to make their slides speak for themselves. When you can do that, you can skip the meeting.

Your slides are not your presentation. They are a prop you use while you give your presentation. They are a way of emphasizing key points to help get a message across. They are also not your notes to remind you what to talk about. When you present, remember that PowerPoint is simply a tool you use while you give your presentation.

Measurement Dangers

I have always been a little suspicious of metrics as a way to measure people. We have all seen how people can "game" a measurement. For example, measuring software developers by lines of code written can cause developers to write more "verbose" code. When this happens the measurement stops working since people adjust to meet the goal. Worse though, is when the gaming creates unintended consequences. In our example, senior software developers can stop coaching the junior developers to have time to focus on their own lines of code. That is certainly not a positive result.

An article today on BoingBoing describes Goodhart's Law, which essentially says that once you start controlling something with a measure, the value of the measure diminishes. Some measurement is unavoidable, but where you do measure watch for Goodhart's law and other unintended consequences.

Franklin and Madison: Founding Brothers Leadership Lesson

This paragraph paints a picture that reminds me of a key value of teamwork. It is from Founding Brothers by Joseph J. Ellis, page 113. The value of teamwork comes not from like-minded people working together; it comes from different people leveraging their complementary strengths.

If Franklin's great gift was an uncanny knack for levitating above political camps, operating at an altitude that permitted him to view the essential patterns and then comment with great irony and wit on the behavior of those groveling about on the ground, Madison's specialty was just the opposite. He lived in the details and worked his magic in the context of the moment, mobilizing those forces on the ground more adroitly and with a more deft tactical proficiency than anyone else. Taken together, he and Franklin would have made a nearly unbeatable team. But in 1790, they were on different sides.

So, as a leader, seek your opposite and value the strength you can bring to each other.