Is your company a mammal or a reptile?

When it comes to the relationship between customers and suppliers, we find that some companies deal with the relationship with customers similar to reptiles, others like mammals, and some have yet to form a clear customer relationship management model The most fundamental difference between reptiles and mammals is the way they reproduce: reptiles produce dozens of eggs that have the chance to hatch, 　　Some of them will survive naturally; mammals are not the same, usually breed a small number of young offspring and nurture them over a period of time. Reptile strategy Many companies have relationships with customers that are essentially similar to crawling and mammals. For example, many will search for a large number of Target customers based on information on media such as newspapers and magazines, and then send information about the company's products and services directly to all potential customers. If the leaflet can get a 2%-3% success rate, then the company can recover the cost. The move is very similar to reptile breeding strategies. These companies will take the initiative to reach thousands of potential users, such as classic door-to-door marketing. 　　The result, of course, is that some potential users may "survive" as real customers. From the supplier view, but also on the network to search for a large number of corporate resources and product information, and then according to the selection of competitive bidding, will give dozens of potential customers to provide inquiry (RF), and then static reply. 　　The buyer's business behavior is similar to that of reptiles. "Mammalian class" strategy if you look at the sales process of a company that has a good design and perfect financial management system, you will find that the best place for them is to have a tightly designed customer relationship management hierarchy---------------------the division between ordinary customers and close joint operations is unusually clear, and the company has developed. Companies to managers, marketing personnel have a rigorous inspection system. Not only that, they also use quantitative methods such as marginal revenue, operating costs, and buyer behavior to strictly differentiate between existing and potential customers. 　　All this builds the company's entire market operation system. The companies that differentiate customers are already well on the path to changing customer relationships, and they are able to get new customers through core value-multiplier services. At the same time, if some customers are considered to have the potential for redevelopment, then other services can gradually deepen their relationship. In the process of the customer relationship operation system, the company attaches importance to the development and cultivation of the cooperative relationship with high potential customers, and consolidates its own benefits in this field. 　　This, of course, creates an intangible barrier to the introduction of new client resources and new customer trust, and is not conducive to nurturing marketers ' ability to deal with complex issues such as core customer changes. The concept of "buying and selling a common destiny" originated in Japan, which aptly describes the typical characteristics of the customer relationships of all "mammalian" companies. The central idea of this kind of mammalian reproductive trait is to concentrate on doing a small amount of things better. The idea describes a customer relationship where a service or product provider is considered a "derivative" of the purchaser's company and vice versa。 This "symbiotic relationship" is characterized by a large amount of information-sharing, long-term cooperation and the purchase of products from suppliers to expand the variety. In the agreement, the customer company and the supplier can improve the quality of the cooperation and keep the company running efficiently. Because the two sides have a deep understanding of each other and a lasting trust in the cooperative relationship, either party can adjust their own operations, even according to the other side of the product demand for long-term business investment. 　　In fact, this kind of trading relationship fundamentally subverts the traditional customer relationship paradigm and the cost control system in the transaction, which essentially realizes the final "mutual win" between the two parties. There is also a potential threat to the "buying and selling side". Because a company "marries" an important business partner means it has to spend a great deal of effort, taking into account both sides ' choices and carefully managing the partnership. For example, the contract must have an "exit" clause, which clearly constrains the way of dissolution of the partnership, responsibility and so on. So that the interests of both sides can only be guaranteed, after all, benefit sharing is also necessary to bear the obligation, so these cumbersome problems are possible to solve. 　　Due to its good results in business practice, many companies prefer such customer relationship models. In any case, we can not deny that the "buyer and seller of the fate of" customer relationship provides a complete pattern of benefit distribution, and the risk of effective control, in fact, this is also a reorganization of the value chain. 　　In fact, McDonald's has established such a customer relationship model from the outset with its core suppliers, so these vendors have been hugely successful as McDonald's has become bigger and stronger. 　　The choice of the "platypus" strategy requires more upfront upfront investment, such as great energy, long-term nurturing, and a lot of organization and coordination work. Speaking of Dell, does it belong to the reptile or the mammalian class? Accurately, the "platypus" to describe Dell and global customer relations is the most image. 　　The platypus is a mammal, but it breeds like reptiles and should belong to a particular mammal class. Dell is managed by a flat market, with management tentacles extending to cargo mailing, advertising and website activities. In this regard, the company seems to be using the "reptile class" strategy to open up the market. But when you study it carefully, you'll find that Dell is the absolute rule of "mammal class" in dealing with the future market. Here are three things to prove: First, Dell is leading a large company account that is relevant to its important business. In Dell's business activities, the customer relationship management process, the typical "mammal class" strategy application traces are very obvious. As a case in point, Dell is very concerned about large customers and has set up an integrated enterprise internal resource network for the customer's business. 　　The features of these URLs are that the structure and design are entirely in accordance with customer preferences. Second, by pricing, Dell is looking for relatively mature buyers who do not need too much technical support either during the purchase or after the transaction is completedLicensee。 Dell products are priced more often than most competitors producing similar products. 　　High-priced policies can help Dell filter out the customers they need, and this strategy also enables Dell to maintain strict control over customer cost. Third, Dell has carefully analyzed its customer base, trying to find the buyer's information that is consistent with Dell's objectives and the trading methods that the target customers have become accustomed to. This information can help Dell to focus on those who need long-term maintenance of customer power marketing. 　　Not only that, the rich information can also show customers desire to purchase, so that Dell for different customers to provide targeted quotes. This shows that the company in the expansion of customers, the key customers must focus on marketing. In fact, any company must have a clear strategic choice to help its market develop effectively. Without a clear choice, a vague and wavering approach in the face of two distinct strategies will lose a lot of team resources and energy, and even cause unnecessary competition inside.