ech: The dangers of saying “no” in technology //

Many stories have been told about people who decided to spend one day saying “yes!” to everything and everyone.

It is very dangerous to say “no” when it comes to marketing technology and operations. Let me be clear, there are good and bad reasons to say “no” in the marketing technology and operations space.

However, it is possible to be branded a dream killer or wall of no. Maintaining positive relationships is important.

There is a way, where there is a will.

In my career, I’ve seen situations where stakeholder required, for instance, a project management tool. Instead of going to the marketing tech and operations people, they chose a tool that offered a free tier such as Asana or Trello.

Sometimes, they used their company email address. Sometimes they used their personal email address. Sometimes they accidentally used their personal email address, since that was the Google account they were currently logged into.

This is something I have seen happen in many other systems, such as Google Analytics. In the end, the user invites colleagues and team members to join him in the unvetted system.

Instigators don’t usually try to thwart the MOps and martech teams in most cases. They are not trying to undermine the IT security policies of the company or increase the likelihood of data breaches.

They have a simple need and have found an easy and free solution. They can often argue that the information is not that sensitive in many cases.

They could have avoided oversight, or they may have. They may act out of ignorance or to avoid bureaucracy.

Although I know that not all of these cases are reported, I have seen many attract attention. The marketing and operations people are often frustrated when such instances are made public.

The IT and legal security teams are usually alarmed and take steps to prevent company email addresses being used for the service. Drama ensues, as you can see. Fun.

Let’s not forget those instances when stakeholders find a brilliant solution and get a senior executive approval before the ops people even know about it.

Either they have a problem and solved it or they feel that talking about it to tech and operations will hinder their ability to help the organization. At such times, it is crucial to use the Most Respectful interpretation principle.

There are many reasons why such a mess could have begun, but it is likely that the instigator was told “no” or expected not to be told “no”. Sometimes, repenting after the fact is easier then asking permission. As a disclosure, I do not like it when people say “no”.

Deeper: How to build a useful martech stack

Avoiding disasters even if ‘yes’ is not an option

There are certain times when “yes” may not be an option. It is difficult to avoid situations such as the one I described above. There are some strategies that can help.

It is important to convince stakeholders that we, as marketers and operations professionals, aim to help others succeed – and do so often and impressively.

We don’t slow down things to make thorough and careful deliberations for power trips, sabotage or just for fun.

We bring a larger-picture perspective to any system or initiative.

This can be communicated by following the agile philosophy.

Transparency is a key tenet. Transparency is key. If we can show backlogs or Kanban boards, stakeholders will be able to understand what’s happening.

Instead of saying “no”, we can sit down with stakeholders to collect requirements and use cases. This will allow us to walk through some of these issues or challenges.

We can help stakeholder understand if the new system they want to use integrates well with their CRM. If it doesn’t, the stakeholder should be able to understand why.

Iteration is another concept that agile philosophy allows for. It is possible that a stakeholder has a very important question that others have not yet accepted.

Iteration can reveal whether the larger ask is worth iterating on. A proof of concept is possible.

A multivariate tool is another option for UX issues. It can be used to quickly and easily test out something without any commitment.

If a MVP, proof-of-concept or A/B test gives poor or questionable results, then the stakeholder will hopefully be able to better understand why they aren’t satisfied.

Sometimes, “let’s try that” can be a better answer than “yes,” while still avoiding the dangers associated with saying “no”.

Get deeper: 3 tips to navigate the maze of martech markets

There are more people who could say “no”

Because more people can kill an invention, it is important for MOps and martech professionals to be able to respond to such requests.

Legal and IT security are key players in martech plans, as I already mentioned. Finance, vendors, regulators and partners are all possible actors. Fostering positive relationships has become so important.

Engaging stakeholders and accounting for multiple issues in advance can help us prepare for the inevitable scrutiny by stakeholders.

This can increase stakeholder confidence that their operations and tech colleagues are truly looking out for them.

Avoid falling for the traps of “no”

We have all been there.

Although stakeholders’ fear of us saying “no”, which is understandable, can be a contributing factor to such incidents.

To avoid the dangers associated with “no”, we don’t always have to say “yes” but it is possible to use “let’s try that” or “maybe” to help stakeholders understand the larger picture and the reasons why they aren’t able to do so.

Deliberations might reveal a better solution that requires less effort. They will see us as their allies and work together to help them succeed.

The post The dangers in saying ‘no” in martech was first published on MarTech.