After we were awarded the business, which we were told would be a true “partnership,” not the usual “vendor relationship,” the first thing we did was produce a mini deck of our proposal, which we presented to the divisional managers who would benefit from our work. Each mini deck was modified to appeal to the corresponding manager by focusing on his specific “issues” and showed how our work would “integrate” with his efforts. Almost all of these managers then asked if we could create a C-level deck of no more than three slides which they could use for upcoming meetings with, well, C-level executives.
After this, we presented a kick-off deck to the client team to lay out our project plan. We explained that our first deliverable would be a strategy deck outlining how we would approach the key business concerns. Our strategy deck was presented a few weeks later and provided a 30,000 foot view of the situation. The deck pointed out low hanging fruit. It also identified problem areas that were tough nuts to crack. We typically refer to our strategy deck as the fruit and nuts deck.
Our next deliverable was the research and analysis deck. This deck talked about how we created a 360o view of the client’s customers. This was important because the company was trying to reverse its recent performance 180 degrees. Of course, the analysis wasn’t just a compilation of “nice-to-knows;” it was “actionable.” The client said, and I quote, “This is really good stuff.”
Right after the research and analysis deck we interviewed a group of senior managers and then presented to them the SWOT deck, you know, Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. We like the SWOT deck because it creates kind of a strategic landscape in a four box matrix. Hey, what’s a consultant without a four box matrix? The SWOT deck went over very well and we saw heads nodding in agreement, although none of the managers actually said anything. Our presentation ran into lunchtime and everyone just took off.
Our marketing team then followed up with a series of creative decks that described the various campaigns that would be launched. For instance, one deck dealt with our mass media coverage. Another dealt with the whole online/offline advertising tradeoff. I mean online is where it’s going, but its not there yet. And we’re not even talking about interactive media. A third deck dealt with guerilla marketing. The managers looked a little puzzled after this last one, but our client said it didn’t matter because he didn’t get any “pushback.”
Separate decks were also prepared for B-to-B, B-to-C, and 1-to-1 programs. All of the decks contained pro formas with projections of CPL, CPO, and ROI based on cost estimates expressed in CPM. Unfortunately, because of the confusion over these metrics we were asked to create a metrics deck explaining our measurement methodology. We did that, and it must have been spot on because we never heard about it again.
Eight months into the year, with the front end planning done, we put the programs into the market and started monitoring the back end. Tracking reports were generated on a 30-60-90 day schedule with roll ups and roll downs. All these results were put in results decks and distributed to the key stakeholders. The funny thing is some of the stakeholders weren’t aware they were stakeholders until they got their deck. We also found out that two of the stakeholders had changed jobs.
Each month we also disseminated business trend information in status decks. These reports concentrated on “incremental” results. However, because the programs had just started, most of the results were preliminary and we cautioned about reading into them and jumping to conclusions too quickly. The managers felt better when we told them that in a few months we’d go back and do a “deep dive” on everything.
We paid off this promise when we delivered the learnings deck. The learnings deck is a comprehensive summary of everything that was tested and learned during the year. This deck is really critical since most of the time no one can remember what was learned. Once we showed the client team members what was learned in the learnings deck, they were impressed.
As a companion to the learnings deck we produced the Year-in-Review deck. This deck is different than the learnings deck in that the Year-in-Review deck is a top down overview of the year’s activities, while the learnings deck is a bottom up assessment of tactics. Having both a top down and bottom up assessment means you’ve got everything covered.
Incredibly it has now been a year since we won the business. The company’s performance hasn’t changed much, if you don’t count the small dip in the last month. Unfortunately, the client said he’s got to shake things up. In fact, we’ve got to re-pitch the business. The competition is likely to be really tough, so we’ve begun putting together a really great deck. This deck is even better than last year’s deck, so I think we’ve got a good shot at keeping the business.
No comments:
Post a Comment