Let’s quote Deming – “You can’t manage what you can’t measure.” This quote does not mean we share measure absolutely everything. Most of the gauges in your car don’t mean anything to you; unless something lights up. Your engine’s temperature is irrelevant, until there’s vapor coming out of the engine.

I advocate for measuring what matters, and keeping data for future use. The action of calculating and tracking multiple KPIs is expensive. It is expensive on time, on money and on the capacity to focus. I do not advocate for not measuring anything. What I I am trying to say is that you need to make sure you are measuring for outcomes with reliable KPIS.

There are risks

Measuring performance has three big risks. The first risk is confidently displaying numbers and indicators that inherently wrong. Second risk is optimizing for the indicator. (Goodhart’s Law). The third risk is incentivizing certain behaviors which can make the issue worse (Cobra Effect). These risks are not mutually exclusive.

Indicators can be wrong for two reasons: poor calculations or inaccurate data. For an indicator to be trustworthy both calculations and inputs must be accurate. An example of these issues can be seen with CAC or Cost of Acquiring a Customer. The formula can be wrong if we don’t accurately define what is a Customer. Data can be wrong if we didn’t identify all marketing and sales costs. In my experience most people get this wrong because of ignorance rather than malice.

The implications of optimizing with results is known as Goodhart’s Law. The law states that when a measure becomes a target it ceases to be a good measure. In other words, when we reward performance we can expect optimization to achieve this goal. A contact center example can be average call duration. Agents will optimize for ending the call quickly, rather tan customer satisfaction or actual problem resolution.

The Cobra effect is closely related to Goodhart’s Law. The Cobra Effect is a perverse incentive in which the intention has a negative effect. The Cobra Effect name came to be when there was a cobra outbreak. In order to control the number of cobras a bounty was set for every dead cobra. People started raising cobras until the bounty was removed. All farmed cobras were then released into the wild.

What do Challenges have to do with App Messaging?

Challenges have implications with App Messaging Initiatives. Your organization need to make sure data is accurate and properly identified and segregated. Secondly you need to understand what is the desired impact of the communication approach; and whether the organization is properly aligned on the desired result. Thirdly we want to incentivize for outcomes rather than outputs.

Simple actions for better measurements

Clean Data and Accurate Calculations

There are simple actions to properly calculate your KPIs. The first one is making sure your data is accurate. This entails defining your data, creating data catalogues and some levels of Data Governance. The second element is understanding how you determine and establish your KPIs.

Right Data and the Right Level of Granularity

Data is not only relevant for app messaging. If you are not properly determining your catalogue and cleaning up your source you will have faulty accounting and performance data. Are we capable to identify which part of our Twilio SMS bill was used for marketing, onboarding or transactional push notification? If we can’t trust our Twilio expenses, Can we trust our Cost of Acquiring a Customer? This goes beyond billing, if all messages fall in the same bucket, can we slice and dice deliverability or open rates?

Data can be sanitized inside our system or outside of our system. Inside of our system will rely on your data strategy. Sanitizing data from outside our system can be done by properly setting up accounts. These setup is good not only to track our expenses and metrics, but also for InfoSec and access controls.

A good practice before using any third party solution is to understand the account structure. Identify how billing is managed, and whether you will need to use different API Keys. Adapt your third-party service providers to your domains and value streams. Most services like OneSignal, Twilio, Mandrill will have ways for you to organize your account. A concrete example is Twilio you can have an organization and multiple sub-accounts.

Optimize for Outcomes

Preventing the Cobra Effects is fairly straight forward. We need to optimize for the desired outcome and end result. Outcomes and indicators can and should be defined based on the message intentionality. As defined in a previous post, messages should have an intention. Ben Chestnut said it best: “If you have something interesting to say, send an email. Otherwise don’t send anything. It’s really that simple.

Informational Messages: These types of messages are meant to inform the user. No action or feedback is required. Since action is not required, deliverability and openrate are the metric we want to evaluate.

Actional Messages: These types of messages are meant to inform the user and motivate action. User action and feedback are desired. Deliverability and Open Rate are important to track baseline behavior. However both activational and promotional messages will need additional measurables.

• Activational: Activational messages are meant to elicit action. In order to track action we should design a funnel based on number of users that performed the action after opening the message.

• Promotional: Promotional messages have the goal of conducting a sale. In a purist sense, this is an activational message and we need to track the number of users that performed the action. However a good practice would be to also track the additional revenue generated by sending that specific message.

Conversational Messages: This type of communication is meant to have an ongoing flow of messages around a specific topic. Your app will most likely delegate this to your sales department and customer support departments. These departments will take considerations like average wait times and time to resolution. The scope for app messaging could be openrate and deliverability.

Closing Remarks

Measuring performance is more about creating effective measurements and optimizing for outcomes. If we optimize for open-rates with clickbait titles the customer will open the message, but it won’t increase sales. If we optimize for number of contacts we will saturate our customers email inbox and their lock screens at detriment of the Net Promoter Score.

Companies need to understand that each type of message will require its own indicator. Using irrelevant metrics has an impact on cognitive load and the number of people required to keep track of performance. Simplify and align metrics to moments in your customer’s journey.

As you start sending messages you will likely skip straight to delivery rather than planning. We all work with deadlines, but it is important to consider the quality of our data from day 1. Otherwise we will be able to claim fantastic but faulty KPIs.

Note that this post does not discuss brand voice. A brand voice should be part of your brand strategy. I am not an expert on branding but the definition of how your brand looks, talks and communicates is critical to consistent and memorable communications. See Mailchimp’s example.

The role of the UX Copywriter has grown in importance. A UX Copywriter is responsible for writing and structuring copy that moves users towards accomplishing a goal. UX Copywriters are amazing, but they are also a luxury most startups can’t afford. Companies with bigger budgets can hire them, but often underutilize them.

The incapability of crafting proper messages is the result of organizational silos, the lack of process, and the transversal nature of communications. My proposal to achieve consistent and efficient messaging is the internal agency model.

Collaboration and Teamwork

For the internal agency model to work there must be some organizational baseline. The company should have a clear user journey already in place. People should also be literate in communication concepts. These considerations will create constraint, which is good for delivery and consistency processes.

The internal agency model is based on requests. These requests are made with a specific brief. Message copy request should emphasize audience, message intentionality, channel, medium and desired goal.

• Audience: Audience is relevant because it will help determine the tone and the type of words.

• Intentionality: What is the purpose of sending this message. Is it to inform, to incite action, or is it part of a conversation.

• Desired Goal: Describes the action a user should make.

• Channel and Medium: Limit the amount of words or characters that can be used.

Conclusion

Copy matters. Unfortunately most organizations are not setup to write effective messages. The limitations to UX Copywriting are budgetary and or organizational. This article proposed using the results of your co-creation sessions (User Journey and Event Storming) in combination with the definitions in the proposed framework. Once these elements are clearly defined, teams will be free to operate within guardrails and create communication briefs.

Melvin Conway rose to fame when he published what would later be known as Conway’s law. The law states that a system will be a replica on how the organization communicates. For example a secretive department will work as a blackbox. All activities inside that department will be unknown to other departments in the organization.

Linear and hierarchical organizational structures have strongpoints and weak points. In the context of app communications it is mostly damaging. The knowledge hoarding and the power dynamics at play increase the bureaucracy needed to coordinate efforts.

This article proposes a simple structure for organizing communications. This rule of thumb builds on top of Event Storming and Domain Driven Design. It serves as a workaround to strict organizational charts.

Why do Information Silos exist?

There are three main reasons for information silos within an organization. All of these reasons are the result of organizational decisions of the past. The first challenge is that information is dispersed across applications and databases. The second challenge is lack of documentation, and operation procedures with a holistic and integral view. The third – and most critical, is a culture that rewards internal competition and ties incentives to metrics.

The technical challenge is relatively straightforward – but not easy. A lot of companies have this issue. There’s a reason for Snowflake’s $60+ billion valuation. This issue can be solved with market tools like Segment, Data Warehouses and Data Lakes. Teams will need to create Data Dictionaries and map attributes across multiple services. This will not be easy, but it is possible. The caveat being people should want to participate.

Second and Third culprits are by-products of leadership. Organizations need to be setup for knowledge sharing and collaboration. If hierarchies and command-control are paramount in the organization, then power dynamics will come at play. Organizations should reward teamwork and end-to-end understanding of the generation of value.

Challenges to Silos for App Messaging

The two main challenges to information silos in the context of app communications are lack of clarity and incentive misalignment. I define lack of clarity as ignorance of what the organization currently has in place in terms of tooling, messaging and data. Incentive misalignment stands for rewarding a part of the experience at the expense of another.

An example to this challenges can be exemplified with Rappi. Rappi used to send SMS, Push Notifications and Delivery Notifications constantly. You would get an SMS offering a 10% discounts, then a Push Notification promoting a new restaurant, and then a push notification to confirm your other with another restaurant. It got so bad even magazines provided tips to block them:

I have never worked for Rappi. My impression is that a part of the growth team was required to hit a minimum number of requests per week; and, they were measured based on an output rather than an outcome. My belief is that there were conflicting priorities and poor alignment on which tools were used to send messages.

How to face these challenges?

Lack of Clarity can be solved in two steps. Step number one being conducting an audit on the messages, tools and systems used to to send messages. The second is to map the ideal future state using techniques like Event Storming. The visualization will help understand and plan how to coordinate and plan the messages. This approach will also help design the user journey, understand the reason for messaging and optimize for user satisfaction and economic value.

I do not have a one-size fits all approach for incentive misalignment. I believe all organizations should try and understand how a decision impacts other metrics. For example how much will a promotional message impact the amount of support requests.

Most importantly, organizations should make the time to understand themselves. Companies should be aware of how culture and behaviors are creating silos in the first place.

Closing Remarks

Organizations are dynamic and ever evolving. The organizational decisions made in the past have an impact on how information is shared and made available. While you can’t change the past, you can intentionally try to get all relevant stakeholders in the same place and agree to change the ways of work towards collaboration.

A key component to your app messaging success is relevance. We want to send an important message at the right time. We need to properly design, plan and define the interactions we will have with our customer.

This article offers a high-level description of frameworks, workshops and techniques to map communications. These frameworks are mostly applied to define a system, its functionality and the interactions a user has with your system. After reading this post, you’ll have understanding of techniques you can use to map your communications.

Co-Creation Techniques

A co-creation technique is a collaborative approach to problem solving. The reason it is called co-creation is because it involved multiple stakeholders. These stakeholders may include the C-Suite, team members, customers and users. The aim of these techniques is to achieve engagement and shared ownership over the proposed solutions. Co-creation leverages participant expertise to achieve collective wisdom or shared understanding.

Co-creation techniques usually take form of facilitated workshops. These workshops may appear to be a game of pasting stickies. In reality a workshop is properly structured and has clear objectives. Creativity within constraints facilitates open dialogue, creative thinking and a free exchange of ideas.

Co-creation techniques are valuable in product design, service development and problem solving. The multidisciplinary nature visibilizes assumptions, and surfaces risk. The result of this process is a better solution that addresses the problem from all angles.

Communication is transversal in nature. This is why shared understanding and documentation come useful. As we co-create solutions each value-stream, team or department optimizes for user experience and not departmental outputs.

User Journey Mapping

User Journey Maps are visual representation of the steps, stages and interactions a user takes when interacting with our system. UJM portrays the experience from pre-service to post-service across all channels. The map helps identify key moments of interaction and areas for improvement.

A User Journey Map is a timeline or flowchart that illustrates progression through different touch-points. These touch-points may be owned or rented; e.g. the user interacts with a Billboard; or, the user discovers the app in the App Store. Each touchpoint is accompanied by relevant information such as:

• Context: What is the current state of the user? This context may be physical, virtual or emotional.

• User Goals: What is the user trying to achieve? User goals are the motivations and desired outcomes.

• Action: What does the user need to do to achieve its goal?

• Emotionality: How does the user feel in this moment? The emotion is important for communication professionals. Emotionality appeals to the irrational part of us.

• Thoughts: What is the user thinking right now? Thoughts are related to conscious concerns.

The Following video displays a way to structure your User Journey Map. Another great resource is the Nielsen Norman Group. There are multiple visualizations you can use from Canvanizer, FigJam (1, 2, 3) and Mural. Each visualization is different, what matters is that everyone at your organization agrees on the User Journey.

The User Journey will usually be a timeline or a flowchart that illustrates user progress. These progression will move users between stages such as pre-service, service and post-service. Each stage will have one or more actions. This timeline displays insights that enable a team to identify areas of friction, confusion and delight.

User Journey Maps share the timeline structure with other techniques. However, there are three main differences with other techniques. Unlike other techniques that focus on the service, USM covers from pre-service to post-service. User Journey Maps consider the user’s motivation, emotions, pain-points and actions; others are exclusively activity based. USMs are higher level and can be consumed by everyone.

Event Storming

Event Storming is a collaborative modeling technique used in software development. This technique helps understand complex business processes and design event-driven systems1. Like all co-creation techniques, it brings together domain experts, developers and stakeholders.

An Event Storming session can happen at multiple levels. Big Picture Event Storming maps the events at a high level and identifies internal and external entities. Event Storming can also be used at component level where more technical implementations are discussed. For the purpose of App Messaging whenever Event Storming is mentioned it refers to Big Picture Event Storming.

An Event Storming session starts by gradually explaining the type of sticky notes and the rules of the game. Note that Event Storming, while super simple, is not as straight-forward as a User Journey Map. If Event Storming is of your interest buy Alberto Brandolini’s Book or Paul Rayner’s Handbook.

During an Event Storming Session, the Team gains insight at system boundaries, uncovers complexity and discovers improvement opportunities. This technique encourages participants to engage in active discussion, challenge assumptions and fill knowledge gaps. Participants leave the session with understanding of the business requirements, a shared glossary and empathy.

User Story Mapping

User Story Mapping is a Collaborative Technique mostly used in Agile Software development. USM visualizes and prioritizes features and functionality from a user’s perspective. This technique, created by Jeff Patton, is a structured visual representation of user stories.

User Story Maps consider actors, goals, activities and user stories. Like User Journey Maps, User Story Maps are presented as a timeline. The main difference being that USM translates Journeys into features and User Stories.

User Story maps begins by identifying and prioritizing user goals and organizing them in a horizontal line. Under each goal, user stories are added vertically. These represent functionality or tasks required to achieve the goal. For app messaging, User Story Maps is used to visibilize the work item.

Closing Remarks

The goal of co-creation techniques is to align the team and achieve shared understanding. For app messaging we only care about the pivotal moments and event where we should communicate to our users. The intentionality of the message (Informational, Promotional, Transactional) will be dependent on what emotional state we are addressing and what is the user’s activity.

The techniques mentioned in this post can be used together or separately. I will be honest, selling this type of workshop will be hard and will require coordination. The real value of understanding what, when and why to send a message is huge. Get relevant people in a room and do a User Journey Map.

This article defines message components. This post builds on top of Communication Models. This article will also contain a give-away. After reading this post you should be able to start organizing your communications.

The End Goal

The App Messaging framework tries to provide order, clarity and shared understanding of the user journey. Each message we send should ideally answer all basic questions: Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why.

Definitions:

Sender: A sender is the person or system that is issuing the message. Answers the question Who.

• A Person: A message triggered manually by a person,

• A System: A message triggered automatically by a system.

• Origination: A message can be initiated by the organization or the end user.

  • Inbound: Message is originated by the end-user

  • Outbound: Message is originated by the organization

Recipient: A recipient is the person or system that receives the message sent by the sender. Answers the question To Whom.

• A Specific Person: A message that is specifically directed at a specific individual,

• An Audience: A message that is sent to a specific user persona or user archetype.

Message: A message is any communication shared between the Sender and the recipient. A message is shared over a medium and a channel. Answers the question What.

• Intentionality: Described the intention of the message. A message can have 3 different intentions, to inform, to create action, or to have a conversation. Intentionality is described in detail in a previous article.

• Message Sequence: A message sequence is a collection of messages that can be grouped together. A message sequence follows a logical order.

Medium: A medium is the mean of transmission through which the message is shared. In the context of App Messaging the Medium could be in-app, email, or SMS. Answers the question How.

Channel: A Channel is the mean through which the message is distributed. A Channel is dependent on a medium. For example an In-App message could be delivered through different channels like a Push Notification. Answers the question Where.

Trigger Event: Indicates a relevant event that should be communicated.Answers the question When.

Goal: The goal is the reason why we are sending a message. Communication for the sake of communication is noise. Goals answer the question Why.

• Message Goal: What are we trying to achieve with this specific message.

• Message Sequence Goal: A Message Sequence goal is the desired result for a series of messages.

• Destination: Where should the audience or user perform the desired goal.

Start Organizing

I created a Notion Template that helps you plan and organize your messages. This document should help multiple departments align on what types of communications are currently being sent.

All organizations – regardless of size, need frameworks and guardrails. Frameworks are useful because they simplify large and complex domains. Guardrails matter because they empower less-senior members of the team move at speed. Without frameworks or guardrails there' will be inconsistency in operating principles, records and service quality.

The goal for this article is to introduce a simplified framework. Complementary techniques like Service Design, Design thinking and Domain Driven Design will be covered in a separate post. This post describes the rationale and definitions inspired by multiple communication models.

Communication Models

Communication derives from the latin word communis or “Common”. The goal of communication is to develop commonness or shared understanding. This understanding takes the form of new information, ideas, attitudes or action. Communication can be classified into multiple types like verbal, non-verbal, written, visual etc. App messaging is a type of communication.

Aristotle Rhetoric

Aristotle proposed a 3 part model, a speaker, a message and a listener. An important detail for this model is that the listener defines whether a conversation will take place. The person that initiatives the conversation will try to get its point across, at times without consideration for the recipient of the message.

Lasswell Model

Harold Lasswell was a political scientist and communication theorist. Lasswell was interested in the effects of communication. He wrote multiple dissertation papers but is mostly known for the Lasswell communication model, published in 1948.

Lasswell postulates that communications should answer 5 basic questions: “Who?” “Says What?”, “To Whom?”, and “With That Effect”. This model has been criticized for being overly simplistic, and for not considering context or feedback.

Schramm’s Model

Wilbur lang Schramm was one of the most influential figures in communications as a field of study in the US. He is considered the father of Communication Studies.

Schramm’s model is similar to Aristotles. Communication requires three elements: A source, a message, and a destination. A message is encoded by the source; the encoded message is then sent to the recipient who then decodes the message. Schramm introduced a communication feedback loop. In order for a message to be encoded or decoded there must be an overlap of context and experience between the source and the recipient.

Remixing the Models

The previously defined models overlapping points. In the simplest of forms there is an issuer, a message and a recipient of the message. For communication to be effective a message can travel in both directions, transforming the recipient into the issuer of the message. However, each of the authors introduce components. Schramm proposes the need of shared contexts; and, Lasswell the concept of Effect.

For app messaging, I propose extending the model with: Message Intent and Message Origination. Message Intentionality is similar to Lasswell’s effect. Message Origination borrows from Schramm’s Source and Destination.

Message Intent

Message intent is the purpose on which the source is sending the message. These intentions may have informational, actional or conversational motivations. Intention and purpose matter because the intent will be defined by context.

Informational Messages: These types of messages are meant to inform the user. No action or feedback is required.

• Transactional Messages: Messages that are sent automatically as a way to confirm system action. These messages are sent as a response or confirmation of an interaction. These types of messages are acknowledgements. Think of a transfer confirmation sent to your email, or a toaster message with a success status, or a micro-interaction indicating a change of status. These are triggered by a system event.

• Informational Messages: Communications sent to notify of a situation that happened outside of the system. For example notifying your users that there will be scheduled downtime.

Actional Messages: These types of messages are meant to inform the user and motivate action. User action and feedback are desired.

• Activational: Communications sent to the user with the intention of making the user react. These types of messages motivate the user to take an action. Some examples are security confirmations and on-boarding communications.

• Promotional: Messages sent to the user with the intention of making a sale.

Conversational Messages: This type of communication is meant to have an ongoing flow of messages around a specific topic. Note that informational and actional messages could eventually become conversational messages.

• Support Messages: Messages that can be originated by the company or the user in order to answer a question or solve a problem.

• Sales Messages: Communications where there is a conversation around a potential transaction. These types of messages differ from promotional messages in the sense that there is a feedback loop.

Message Origination

In Schramm’s model, the source became the recipient when the feedback loop was initiated. This may be confusing as we design out communications. Origination is a way to signal which entity started the conversation. Message Origination is divided into Inbound and Outbound Origination.

• Inbound Origination: Communication was initiated by the other entity. For example a customer reaches out to support. The source is the external party, while the recipient is internal

• Outbound Origination: The first message was sent by the internal entity. For example the system sends a confirmation message to the customer. The source is internal, while the recipient is external.

Closing remarks

This post mixed-and-matched communication models. It then tried to complement these models with Message Intention and Origination. The information shared in this post will be useful as we approach when to communicate, how to design communication triggers and messages, and how to measure performance.

This post was extremely academic, and only loosely connected to product management. Please note that I am not preaching for an academic approach towards product management. I know execution is everything; however, I advocate for being intentional. Theory will help you start painting on your own. It will also transition from paint-by-numbers into being strategic and intentional.

This is the first post in a series related to App Messaging. In this series we’ll cover what are communication fundamentals, which types of messages are there, how to plan a message (Notion Included), when to send a message and how to track message performance beyond deliverability.

The goal of this series is to make it practical. We will do a fictitious example for a Horse Racing Gambling App. There is no particular reason for this with the exception that it is an easy to grasp concept. I also don’t have a relationship with a company in that space.

What is App Messaging:

App messaging is a catch-all term for messages sent to our users or customers. These messages come in varying shapes and sizes. Messages have different intentions, goals, channels, and media.

Messages are sent throughout the customer journey and customer lifecycle. These messages may be related to related to Attraction, Activation, Retention, Referral and Revenue (Refresh on Pirate Metrics).

This series will not discuss Brand Awareness for brevity purposes. This series will assume your app sends in-app messages (notifications or toasts), push notifications, and off-app communications like email and SMS.

Are we doing it right?

I honestly don’t know. Could we do better? Definitely. The goal of communications is to share a relevant piece of information to the right person at the right time. In the context of software, I would modify the previous statement to: Share the appropriate message, to the right person, towards a specific goal in a specific destination. We should try to answer What, When, Where, Why and to Whom in every communication we send.

I have seen companies that compensate their inability to do proper targeting with excessive communications. Their rationale is throw things at the wall and see what sticks. This brute-force attempt can cause churn, decrease brand affinity and hide valuable communications. Send too many messages and your customers will choose to ignore you.

Challenges:

The hard part of app messaging is that it is a transversal activity. Communication does not clearly fit the functional area borders. The biggest challenge in my opinion is how the organization is structured and how political the organization truly is.

Communication and messaging are part of the brand experience. Nevertheless, this does not mean marketing. In order to send relevant communications, we need to understand the customer journey and coordinate accordingly.

There are 3 main category challenges with App Messaging: Technical, Organizational, and Associated Costs. These are catchall categories. The categories will be different depending on company size and team composition.

• Technical Challenges: Is our technology capable of doing what we want to achieve? Do we have the data required to properly target our messages?

  • Centralization: Where should messages be sent from? Organizations will need to define which service will be used to send communications. If there is no centralization, duplicate delivery is the least of your problems. There are potential issues with Personal Identifiable Information.

  • Triggers: When should a message be sent? Organization should understand the dispatch rules, events and message flows. One big challenge lies in non-event driven architectures. Is your system capable to identify an event or a change in state to trigger a message?

• Organizational Challenges: Is our organization ready to collaborate and share? Do we have the maturity not to see this as a turf war?

  • Cross Departmental Communications: People will most likely try to control their narratives. Departments must be aligned as to what will be shared and when. The lack of a proper journey map makes it harder for people to truly align.

  • Communication Silos: Silos lead to misaligned messages and inconsistent tone of voice. Old communications may continue to be sent even when not applicable which may lead to poor customer satisfaction. This issue is once again related to the non-existance of a Journey Map.

  • Data silos: Data silos are closely related to centralization. If the organization uses multiple delivery services, getting data; and, making sense of that data requires additional steps.. Shadow IT is real.

• Associated Costs: Do we know how much our communications are costing us? Communications belong to everyone, but the cost must be associated to a cost center.

  • Financial Costs: Sending messages has a cost. Twilio, OneSignal, Sendbird, MailChimp are affordable, but as message volume increases the financial implications of messaging increases.

  • Brand Perception: Brands that send too many irrelevant messages annoy customers. The affinity to the brand is reduced and the perception of value decreases.

  • Cost Tracking: Brands that send too many irrelevant messages annoy customers. The affinity to the brand is reduced and the perception of value decreases.

Conclusion

Frequency and volume are the easiest variables to explore. Send more, more people will see your messages. Will they eventually start ignoring you? Yes, Most definitely. Our job is to create frameworks and systems that enable different stakeholders to coordinate messages. The organization will be able to face its challenges and create real value for its customers.