We all want long-term customers. Partnerships. That’s what we say in every pitch, that’s what we write on our slides. Anyone who has ever started a new company knows how valuable it is to win projects and clients. You want to please all customers as much as possible, keep every customer forever, an “at all costs” mentality develops. Keep a customer at all costs. 20 years of start-ups and company development later, I see this in a much more differentiated and relaxed way. Below is my current state of knowledge on the subject. <\/p>\n
The experiences of the last few years have made me abandon the “at all costs” mentality. There were actually no outstandingly bad experiences, but it was rather the sum of the events that led me to the conclusion that it is probably better to work on the customer portfolio very actively. <\/p>\n Re-evaluate existing customers every year<\/strong><\/p>\n I am now of the opinion that the existing customer portfolio should be re-evaluated every year. By this I mean that an active process should be underway in the company. This does not mean gradually worsening the conditions for customers until they are looking for a new service provider. Rather, an internal assessment of what the customer brings is needed. In my opinion, it is very important that not only economic (i.e. hard) facts are taken into account. Soft facts are just as important to consider. I consider the following 6 factors to be important: <\/p>\n I think each of these criteria is related to the others. Simply try to allocate points for each criterion. Let’s say, for example, 10 points as a maximum per criterion. If you like, you can add your own company-specific prioritization by weighting the points – the classic utility value analysis says hello at this point. An average value is also defined, which serves as the waterline. If the total number of customers falls below this, it is time to hold appropriate discussions. <\/p>\n Why all this?<\/strong><\/p>\n Many companies cling on to all their customers without making this cost\/benefit consideration. As a rule, 20% of customers are responsible for 80% of the trouble and loss. However, and this is important, the customer is not primarily to blame. Rather, it is the constellation of customer and service provider that no longer fits. <\/p>\n Almost every agency is growing, be it quantitatively or qualitatively. And every company size requires corresponding structures and infrastructures. While it is perfectly obvious that a company with more employees also needs larger office space and acts accordingly, this is not the case with clients. <\/p>\n In a way, as service providers, we owe it to our customers to let them know that we can no longer serve them due to changed circumstances, such as growth, or that they would be better off elsewhere. Unsuitable customer\/service provider constellations are lose-lose situations in which both parties lose. Perhaps only one in the short term and the other in the long term, but the bottom line is that both lose. <\/p>\n And you’re not doing your agency employees any favors by doing this; they usually suffer from such situations and become demotivated as a result. The customer, on the other hand, feels that they are no longer receiving good service and reacts with resentment. A vicious circle. It is important to break this cycle early enough, i.e. before any damage has been done. <\/p>\n Clear communication<\/strong><\/p>\n If you want to end the collaboration with a customer, you should communicate this to the customer personally and as transparently as possible. There is probably not much worse for customers than slowly but surely realizing that they are no longer wanted. So discuss the termination with your customer, offer to help them find a new partner, allow long transition periods and be prepared for initial resentment. This is completely normal; through communication and transparency, the customer will soon understand why you are taking this step and respect it. <\/p>\n More attention from new customers<\/strong><\/p>\n The digital economy is in the fortunate position that we still have a strong surplus of demand. Good agencies can pick and choose their work and clients. Please don’t confuse this with “get every client you want” and “you don’t have to do anything for new business”. You do have to do a lot for new business. <\/p>\n Customers who don’t fit in with a provider are a waste of resources right from the start. I therefore advise, and we practice the same, to always clarify the most elementary questions as early as possible. Such questions can be, for example <\/p>\n There are, of course, a whole series of other questions. Over the last three years, I have asked these and similar questions at the beginning of every inquiry I have made in all my professional activities and in the vast majority of cases, the deal was done. Together with the customer, we found out that the constellation would probably not work. I invested the time that this freed up in the really suitable constellations and achieved a very high closing rate with these. If I had had to invest time in the other leads, that would not have been possible. <\/p>\n Consistently positive reactions<\/strong><\/p>\n Initially, I was worried that customers would not perceive these questions, and especially those about the minimum project volume\/budget, as presumptuous or arrogant. After many such conversations, usually 2-3 a week, I can say that this is not the case at all. I haven’t had anyone who has complained or expressed their displeasure in any way. On the contrary. Most of them say in feedback that they are glad that we are doing this because it has just been clarified and no more time is wasted. <\/p>\n Artikel auf Social Media teilen:<\/p>\n<\/div>
\n(Reading time 4 minutes)<\/em><\/p>\n\n
\n