JUNE 24-30, 2024 SPRINGFIELD BUSINESS JOURNAL · 49 Realizing the importance of trust in producing business results is crucial. Do customers truly trust your company? How does their trust in your brand’s products or services stack up against the competition? And what happens if that trust is absent? When I consider today’s hypercompetitive business atmosphere, I believe that nurturing trust is a leader’s top job, especially in a trust-declining world. The 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer study highlights a constant decline in trust across media, government, business and other institutions. Picture it like a steep waterslide – with trust taking an endless plunge. Despite this trend, there’s a silver lining in Edelman’s findings. Customers still crave deep trust in their chosen brands and the people representing them. The Trust Barometer shows that nearly 7 out of 10 customers now place a higher value on brand trust than ever before. Trust may be dwindling, but its importance in decision-making is rising, offering challenges and opportunities. If you prepare your spokespeople and sales teams to build high trust with customers, you will profit. However, tolerate stationary trust levels and you risk losing sales and market share due to declining customer loyalty and rising customer indecision. Case in point: According to research by a 2022 study by Harvard Business Review, customer indecision accounts for 40% to 60% of missed sales opportunities – with 87% of all opportunities involving moderate to high levels of customer indecisiveness. This is a significant shift and an ominous development that the HBR calls “toxic” for business because it will probably worsen. Still, apart from the warning signs about trust, it’s the impressive rewards of trust-building that should motivate leaders to refocus efforts and reverse the present trust deficit. According to the Trust Barometer, there are substantial advantages for converting your organization’s trustworthiness into brand power, such as six times higher customer loyalty, a seven times increased likelihood of commanding premium prices and eight times more competitive resilience. To enhance trust levels and harness the gains of converting trust into brand strength and sales, consider these actions: 1. Measure. One client company identified its customer greetings as a weakness. When they revamped their training and ongoing measurement, they boosted scores and sales. 2. Engage stakeholders. Address customer concerns promptly. Listen intensely and use customer feedback to solve concerns and prevent future problems. 3. Admit mistakes. Sincerely apologize for errors and thank customers for their feedback. Dodging the problem or blaming someone is fruitless. 4. Be believable. Never mislead or exaggerate. Honesty is crucial, and if you don’t know the answer, find out, rather than trying to sound knowledgeable when you’re not. 5. Demonstrate capability. Customers must see us as believable and capable of delivering what we promise. 6. Provide timely updates to reassure customers that you are on top of things. An energy company formalized customer communications and improved timeliness and uses it as a key differentiator in their niche. Trust is the cornerstone of customer relationships. Its power and influence surpass a company’s reputation, rapport and pricing. So, let’s delve into each of these aspects for a moment. Brand reputation is critical, but trust is even more significant. Why? Because personal experiences can overshadow it. A brand might be lauded in the industry, but if it doesn’t earn consumers’ trust, its reputation can only take it so far. Building strong rapport with a decision influencer may not always withstand the confidence placed in the competition. Trust in another vendor can easily undermine your rapport. I’ve seen clients lose large sales because the salesperson over-depended on the company’s reputation – and lost to the customer’s trust in another vendor. Even though price plays a significant role in purchasing decisions, trustworthy relationships are more powerful. In addition to shaping perceived value, trust becomes a decisive factor when combined with competitive pricing and a compelling value proposition. Trust is more than a virtue – it’s a competitive advantage. But as trust levels continue to plummet, business leaders must be intentional about rebuilding customer faith. Mark Holmes is a consultant, professional speaker and author of “Selling to ELON! Understand, Communicate and Sell to Unique Personality Types,” and he’s president of Springfield-based Consultant Board Inc. and SalesRevenueCoach.com. He can be reached at mark@salesrevenuecoach.com. Got imported meat? Farmers, consumers demand the right to know 6 ways to reverse declining customer trust Congress should stop hiding behind the unelected, bureaucratic, pro-corporate World Trade Organization and restore country of origin labeling for meat in the 2024 Farm Bill. The U.S. House released its draft of the Farm Bill in May, and the Senate distributed its Farm Bill framework, but neither includes mandatory country of origin labeling – known as COOL – for meat. COOL should absolutely be included in the Farm Bill. If you’re a farmer, consumer and/or taxpayer, here’s why it matters. Consumer support for COOL is overwhelmingly high, with 89% of consumers in support. It is one of the rare places in which we have widespread agreement from a vast majority of Americans, yet, somehow, it becomes controversial when it gets to our nation’s capital. In the 2008 Farm Bill, Congress passed mandatory COOL for various products, including meat. This legislation empowered consumers with information about where their food came from and enabled American producers to compete fairly against foreign imports. However, the corporate meat processing industry has opposed mandatory COOL. Despite their efforts, our COOL law stood firm until Canada and Mexico, doing the bidding for global meatpackers, challenged it before the WTO, which ruled against us. In 2015, following the WTO ruling, Congress repealed mandatory labeling for beef and pork. The importance of COOL cannot be overstated. In a marketplace without labeling, multinational corporations maintain leverage over prices, often to the detriment of American farmers and consumers. Leveraging imports, they are able to raise consumer prices while lowering prices paid to U.S. farmers. In 2023 alone, the U.S. imported 3.7 billion pounds of boxed beef and 2 million live cattle – and consumers cannot see where it came from! The implementation of COOL led to an increase in the prices paid to U.S. cattle producers. It turns out that consumers want to – and will – choose American products, supporting American farmers and economies. Immediately after COOL was rescinded, the price of cattle plummeted and cow/calf producers’ profits dropped by 30%, the largest one-year drop in history. Further, the 2022 Ag Census reports a shocking loss of cattle producers: from 2017-2022, the U.S. lost 150,569 cattle operations. Missouri alone lost 9,954 (which is 20% of its cattle operations). This is wealth extracted from our communities and bound for distant shores. This wealth is more than just dollars and cents, especially in Missouri’s rural communities, where family farmers are major economic drivers. This lost wealth means farms aren’t passed down to the next generation, and businesses on Main Street are shuttered because those dollars aren’t circulating locally. For multinational conglomerates, that’s just the cost of doing business. But for people out here, who have tied their fates to the seasons and to the knowledge, skill and land passed down for generations, that cost is simply too high. Contrary to industry claims, implementing COOL does not necessitate an overhaul of existing infrastructure. Processors already possess the capability to provide such information, as evidenced by their tracking of marketing attributes and USDA grading. COOL simply requires the maintenance of information regarding the origin of imported meat and livestock. The WTO’s ruling against mandatory COOL for meat represents a flawed decision that undermines our national sovereignty and consumer rights. Repealing COOL in 2015 was not Congress’ only option. Negotiated settlements are commonplace in WTO disputes, allowing us to keep domestic policies without paying penalties. The U.S. could have engaged in discussions with Canada and Mexico to address broader trade disputes, essentially trading other issues to safeguard COOL. Or even simply paid the fine, as we do in other cases. Recent trade fights make it clear that the WTO’s era of retaliation is over. Congress can’t continue to hide behind the WTO on this. It is imperative for Congress to reevaluate its stance on COOL. It’s frankly absurd to think that virtually every other product has an origin label, and yet meat is excluded. By prioritizing consumer rights and fair competition, Congress can reaffirm its commitment to American producers and consumers. It’s time to bring transparency back to the meat industry and empower consumers with the information they deserve. It’s time to put mandatory COOL back in the Farm Bill. Rhonda Perry is a fifth-generation farmer and executive director of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center. She can be reached at rhonda@morural.org. GUEST COLUMN Rhonda Perry BUSINESS SHIFTS Mark Holmes OPINION WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU Springfield Business Journal welcomes responses from readers. Letters to the editor should be brief, preferably under 300 words, and may be edited for clarity, style and length. No anonymous letters will be printed. Send letters to sbj@sbj.net. Please include your full name and the city where you reside.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy