The authors wanted to present the Think – Feel – Do management model as a potentially ap- propriate base for a new model of managing tasks and production processes in a marketing – oriented companies that operate in accordance to the digital age market demands, where the user‘s experience has become a centre of business, and the speed of the reaction has become the key for the business survival. Internet and accompanied technology have accelerated this pace of doing business, so the place of doing business is no longer important, because the global market is available from every corner of the world and imposes virtual skills when managing tasks, projects and in organizations in general. All this requires rapid flow of in- formation’s, quick adaptation, and also multiplying channels of communication and participa- tion in the execution of various tasks. The key of the success lies in the people, so the success- ful team management has become obligate task to follow.
Keywords: think – feel – do model, management, team management, business optimization.
The digital world exists everywhere around us. The use of social networks is growing daily. Their impact on the marketing and the businesses is enormous. A whole new set of channels has shifted from the focus of communicating of such messages towards a balanced mix of cross – channel dialogue, where listening, inclinations and data for the key users are of the most importance. For marketing, such evolution represents a tremendous opportunity, but also a great challenge. Dialogue and content now have an endless stream. People will talk about the product or a brand name, as they always do, but on the Internet anyone can see them or read about them permanently. People can choose whether to disseminate such informa- tion’s without having to engage in a dialogue or still they want to talk about them. They can choose whether they’ll stay anonymous or they want to reveal their identity. Now, time and place do not matter anymore. Internet users actively create and share relevant contents and information’s. Because people prefer to share their information’s with others via direct con- tacts or via their social networks, they’ll become an integral element of the marketing process. People talk using various media and channels. They no longer consume communica- tion messages passively, but they actively participate in a mutual communication. So, there is a need for the cross – channel interaction.
As a result, there is an ever increasing pressure on the leadership for the purpose of redesign- ing the marketing organizational structure in such a way that the customer or the customer’s experience will be at the centre of observations and for the customer, based on the analytics database, to create a personal marketing, – intended just for him. All will be in function with the customer in focus; all of his thinking will be at the centre of our attention.
The relationship marketing is part of a new approach to the customer relationship manage- ment that aims to mutual role of trust and loyalty of buyers and also the sellers of products or services. This is inter – functional, consumer – oriented business strategy, which is directly fo- cused on achieving the entire customer satisfaction, and it represents the final stage in the string of the development of loyalty programs between consumers and their profitable cus- tomers. The term relationship marketing is used to promote the idea that the main objective of such business is building the stable and long – term relationships with all the market factors that will contribute to the company’s success. It is considered as the highest vision of coopera- tion between consumers and the businesses. It is impossible to achieve such kind of relation- ship if such communications and activities have to go deeply, through the organisational hier- archical structure.
The name ‘organization’ comes from an ancient Greek word organon that stood for a tool, instrument, or a musical instrument. The word ‘structure’ comes from the Latin verb struere which denotes concordance or concurrence. According to Drucker, the organizational struc- ture represents a unique system of all organizational parts that makes the company.
The organization allows the realization of the most complex tasks and the realization of the effects of synergy; shortens time of their execution and rationalizes the utilization of the nec- essary production factors.
Classical organizational theory dates back to the beginning of the twentieth century, the neo- classical theory to the mid – twentieth century, and the contemporary organizational theory belongs to the end of the twentieth century. Classical organizational models certainly have their own advantages but usually carry on problems, such as a distorted flow of information’s due to profound hierarchical set – up, because of the lack of accountability, low degree of in- troduction of innovation, and hard and slow introduction of changes. The types of classical or traditional organizational structure are recognised as linear, functional, semi – linear and divisional.
Neoclassical organizational theory or the theory of interpersonal relationships is characterized by the dominance of sociological and psychological approaches when shaping organizational theories. Social theories its centre of gravity usually set from formal to informal aspects of the organization (March and Cyert, 1963). When mentioned the formal character of organisation, the greatest number of people and, above all, the laymen, thinks of the hierarchy. But when mentioned the informal organisational aspects, people often thought of the spontaneous interaction of people that is formed by itself as that form of relationships on such a way con- tributes to the organizational structure. Neoclassical organizational structures are semi – com- pliant and, above all, here we think of the matrix of the organizational structure, and also that applies to the modern organic structures.
Hierarchy is mostly linked to a vertically placed organizational structure that coordinates rela- tionships and tasks based on formal superiority that makes such chain. The depth of the hier- archy is expressed by the amount of instances in that chain. If the horizontal coordination was not carried out at the same level in width, we are talking about a centralized organizational structure, without control of superiors in the hierarchical structure, but if the horizontal coor- dination exists, we are talking about a decentralized organizational structure.
The organizational structure is usually associated with the organization, which is wrong, be- cause the organizational structure is narrower than the organization, and, along with the orga- nizational tools and organizational procedures, makes the constituent elements of the organi- zation (Dabić et al., 2013). The essential aspects of organizational structure are differentiation that can be horizontal, vertical, simple and complex, as well as an integration and chain of command. Integration refers to the lines of responsibility, the formal communication chan- nels, formal work groups, and relationships towards authority and responsibility, while at the same time the chain of command refers to the task grouping in the organizational units as well as care for the size of the same (Dabić et. al.2013).
The elements of the organizational structure are as follows (Dabić et al., 2013):
1. Operative part that is made up of all employees.
2. The strategic part that constitute the members of the top management.
3. The middle part that constitute the members of the middle management level.
4. Tech – work framework structure, made up of specialists with the gained specific knowl- edge and skills, who are often positioned outside the formal structure.
5. Staff members supporting the management.
The quality structure must reflect corporate goals and plans; they must define management competencies, and to ensure effective performance of jobs and tasks throughout the team col- laboration. For every company, no organizational structure is perfect and such structure is not ‘a dead organism’ and needs to be adapted to the human resources it possesses and to the sur- rounding environment of influence.
In today’s rapidly changing market environment, management and leadership have become increasingly difficult and demanding, and from the managers have been asked to fulfil more goals in increasingly short terms. Due to increasing competition, the companies need to opti- mize their businesses. Each day the new tools, methods and approaches arise that allow for increasing business efficiency and profitability. One such approach is also focused on the business processes, the symbol of modern doing business (Hernaus, 2006). Since this era does not belong to the era of the great inventions, but technological progress is more ‘cosmetic’ and commercially oriented, the only difference is possible to draw if you constantly keep with the training and posses good reflexes. Today win those who can manage with the cycles of procurement and implementation of information’s, services, materials and products during the shortest period of time (Nobilo, 2017). One of such approaches is also aforementioned orien- tation on business processes that today require such decisions which have to be taken at the level of work i.e. the occurrence of the problems, because the competition destroys organiza- tions that think they have the ability to make decisions managing through a deep hierarchy (Tenner and De Toro, 1996, p.14). The company should be organized in such a way that al- lows the vertical and horizontal flow of information’s necessary for the achievement of orga- nizational goals (Daft, 2004, p.88).
If we want to understand the important concept in, above all, traditional, classical organiza- tions, and also in all other forms of organizations – is the understanding of hierarchy. The hi- erarchy gives them structure ‘which is a form of a protection that keeps them away from the dangers of the outside world’ (Leavitt, 2003, p.102). New and more efficient, control concepts are constantly seeks for, but any model would hardly survive without the organization.
The hierarchy becomes shallower, and the most successful practices are even completely abol- ished or the vertical organization becomes the horizontal one, and sets a completely new view of the management itself.
People are the key constituents of the project and / or organization success. They bring knowledge, innovation and competence, and they are the source of competitive advantage on the basis that it is then possible to distinguish successful from unsuccessful organizations (Galetić, 2011, 103). Human potential influences on determining of the profile of the organi- zation with their knowledge and ability. With their actions they bring to life the formal orga- nization, but they also shape the informal organization (Žugaj, Šehanović and Cingula, 2004, p.154).
The most developed economies in the world, more than half of their gross domestic product based on knowledge. High tech industries have almost doubled their share in their output over the last twenty years, while the services based on knowledge and innovation has beed grow- ing even faster.
Unfortunately, there is no single and accepted definition of intellectual capital as an econom- ic, untouchable value. Nevertheless, one group of authors and prof. Sundać who is also among them defines intellectual capital as one of the three essential components of which synergies can result in solid intellectual capital i which can then become a source of competitive advan- tage:
Human capital – skills, knowledge; skills and accumulated experience of the company’s em- ployees and managers reflect dynamics of intelligent organization activities when applied in the competitive environment.
Structural capital – offer support to the human capital, which includes systems of information technology, corporate images, owners databases, organizational con- cepts, documents, patents, licenses and copyrights.
Consumers’ capital – interrelation of the company and its clients.
People are the key element of a project’s and / or organization’s success. They are the carriers of knowledge, innovation and competence, and they are also source of competitive advantage on the basis that it is possible to distinguish successful from unsuccessful organizations (Galetić, 2011, p.103). Human resources influence the organization with their knowledge and ability. With their activities they bring to life the formal set organization, but they also shape the informal organization (Žugaj, Šehanović, Cingula, 2004,p.154).
Instead of a business based on tangible assets, companies need to develop a sense of creating, transferring, integrating, protecting and exploiting their intangible intellectual property, i.e. the most valuable form of capital they possess today: their intellectual capital (Kolaković, 2003, p. 3).
Since everything is circling around the people, it is necessary to know them well, whether it is about managing the human resources or communicating with the consumers. If we make a mistake when addressing or when assigning tasks, we will not achieve the success and the de- fault goals will remain unachieved. The removal of barriers that can complicate the relation- ships or introduce noise into the communication channels, the exclusion of mediators and the establishment of direct, loyal relationships are the main tasks of all business segments, from the management of the human resources, internal communications, through external commu- nications and marketing, to sales.
THINK – FEEL – DO MODEL
Today’s modern marketing organization is complex and requires a purposeful planning and a combination of talent, technology and insight in the need of the consumers. Experts with the general knowledge managed the traditional marketing in organizations. But with the devel- opment of social and digital marketing, the development of a range of new specialized roles was ushered in. Therefore, marketing leaders are no longer effective if they manage projects through a hierarchical structure, but from them is expected to be in the position of a coordina- tor, or better the ‘conductor’ who supervises the talents who have at that moment gathered around a common idea that brought them together, and that they want to put into action. This gathering may relate to individuals within the company, outside of it, in parts of companies or in the several independent companies.
THINK – The focus on data and analytics
FEEL – The focus on inclusion and consumer experience
DO – Focus on content and production
Eminent authors, like Ordanini, Dedrick and Kraemer point out that is a better relationship ‘orchestra – conductor’ but ‘subordinate – superior’. This model is called ‘The Orchestrator Model’ and it doesn’t categorize roles in marketing by the job name, but instead classifies them into three major groups as follows, to ‘think’ marketing, ‘feel’ and ‘do’ marketing. In the ‘thinking’ group there are people involved with analytical skills for the purpose of taking over of tasks, such as the analysis on optimizing the return on investment, or the analysis of the personal data safety policy. In the ‘do’ group are those individuals with the skills to devel- op working content, while the third, ‘feel’ group is focused on the interaction with the con- sumers, as they usually do in customer services on social networks. Depending on the task, the proportion of participation of each of the three groups is subjected to changes, as can be seen in Figures 2 and 3. The formation of teams with regard to the task uses the best compa- nies, such as Google, Amazon, Nike or the Red Bull but it requires specified culture in which the central leadership has been convinced that local teams understand their strategy and they are willing to cooperate in order to execute the job. It works well only when everyone in the team is inspired by the purpose and clearly understands the previously set goals.
JUNG’S THEORY OF TEMPERAMENT
With only a superficially glance at the distribution of tasks that are assigned to the certain ‘Think’, ‘Feel’ or ‘Do’ groups suggests that the model can be linked to psychological theories of personality traits or temperament, and when we add colours that regularly appear in the graphics models: Think (blue), Feel (green) and Do (red), by this we only confirmed the aforementioned. The only difference that appears is evident lack of a single, yellow colour, and in accordance to the author, it’s one of the main criticisms of this theory.
Based on his research, Hippocrates has identified four different types of personality, and when he, together with colleagues identified which group a person belongs to, he could predict the response of such person. Hippocrates thought they could determine the personality type of one person based on the different proportions of his or her body fluids. Today we know that this part of his theory that encompasses bodily fluids was inaccurate, but his observations of behaviour of an individual were so accurate that they formed the foundation for many person- ality theories of today.
Based on the work of Hippocrates, the Swiss psychologist Carl Jung has defined the four temperaments that he characterized by the following colours: cold blue, earthy green, sunny yellow and fiery red. Each individual has embedded in his personality the energies of the en- tire colours, but presented in different proportions.
Source: Bradway, K. (1964), “Jung’s Psychological Types”, The Journal of Analytical Psy- chology, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 129-135.
Depending on the situation, our different energy colour and behavioural characteristics asso- ciated with them will be present, so cold blue shows detachment; it is aimed toward the goals and is analytical, while earthly green gives a peaceful character, resolves the situation and it’s compassionate. Bright yellow gives cheerful and witty character which lifts and inspires, and the red hot colour is positive, determined and persistent. Hence, this would be some of the characteristics of each of the four groups of characters: blue suggests cautious, precise people who care for formality, green colour describes a caring and relaxed people who like to share; yellow describes dynamic, persuasive people that are easy to excite and the red colour accord- ingly competitive minded, demanding people of the strong will. Of course, here are not listed all of the features, but this brief overview will serve us to easier connect theory and practice, as well as a mini – guide for the constitution of formation depending on our needs, i.e. for the task for which the same has been formed.
In today’s digital, globally networked world, all processes have accelerated. This acceleration has not overlooked marketing but it is clearly seen in the marketing. Not only is there a multi- tude of available information’s, but all the information’s are coming to us through the multiple channels; it is more proper to say that they are breaking through and constantly testing our time and curiosity. Although more messages and contents are produced than ever before, thought peoples interest in them actually falls. All people can almost find and know all re- quested facts. We can say that general knowledge is available and therefore less appreciated in the business world. That is not enough. The secret of success lies in the specialization. We are constantly looking for ways to ‘be better than other’ and to come up with the different ap- proaches. Today, many tactics and tools that have recently been considered as ‘the latest and experimental’ are now common practice. Neither the marketing departments have been by- passed as they see a clear need for the redesign of the organizational structures that can go hand in hand with today’s business requirements.
Let’s imagine, for a moment, in today’s world of social networks and online media, the situa- tion of a traditional organizational structure, considering a deep hierarchy, whose public rela- tions department should properly respond to an income crisis situation, respond to the provo- cation from the competition campaign, design and realize any marketing, sales or improve- ment action, but need agreement of five or even more people who were positioned higher in the company’s hierarchical order. Today, for the abovementioned to consider more than one person can be too much.
Modern approaches to the management cited approach based on the characteristics, access based on skills and style, situation access and team leadership as a possible model of leader- ship and Think – Feel – Do model has been derived from the individual characteristics of each of these approaches. Some individual authors like Debellis indicate the fourth, yellow colour that is lacking in the basic Think – Feel – Do model that would form a ‘Create’ group and ac- cordingly, it would be responsible for developing the new products, improving of existing products and general planning and innovation development. The authors of this study agree with the need for the introducing of this fourth category beside other groups, which would represent the characteristics of the ‘sunny yellow’ temperament, but the more appropriate name would be ‘inspire’ or ‘innovation’, so the members of this category would be, in addi- tion to the abovementioned, in charge for the new ideas, to promote innovation and inspira- tion of consumers outside the company, or for the members of the team within the company. When creating teams of specialists in accordance with the particular task, and once we’ve involved them in sufficient numbers, but also in a way that is best for the given situa- tion, they will produce the best results during the shortest period of time. The ‘orchestra’ that consist of the blue, red, green and yellow colours is the future model that has already begun today.
Authors of this paper think that Think Do Feel Inspire Model alone or combined with some other techniques may also be a possible good tool for recruitment and help in personal development plan of employees run by human resource departments. Possible way of researches may focus on proving that personality can help or aggravate doing the job, because there is small chance that Sunny Yellow can enjoy working in Research and Development Department or to find out that caring Earth Green is great for customer support. Great team is made of all “four colours” but on the right spot for them.
1. Bradway, K. (1964). Jung’s Psychological Types. The Journal of Analytical Psychology, [online] 9(2), pp.129-135. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1465- 5922.1964.00129.x/full [Accessed: 13.02.2017].
2. Cyret, R.M. and March, J.G. (1963). A Behavioural Theory of the Firm. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
3. Dabić, M., Potočan, V., Nedelko, Z. and Morgan, T. R. (2013). Exploring the use of 25 leading business practices in transitioning market supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, [online], 43(10), pp.833-851. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-10-2012-0325 [Accessed: 03.03.2017].
4. Daft, R. L. (2004). Organization Theory and Design. Mason, OH: Thompson, p.88
5. Debellis, M. (2014). Think, feel, do – the new pillars for marketing success. CUInsight,
[online]. Available at: https://www.cbinsight.com/think-feel-do-the-new-pillars-for-mar-
keting-success.html [Accessed: 01.03.2017].
6. De Swaan Arons,M., Van den Driest, F. and Weed, K. (2014). The Ultimate Marketing
Machine. Harvard Business Review, [online] pp.55-63. Available at: https://hbr.org/
2014/07/the-ultimate-marketing-machine [Accessed: 03.03.2017].
7. Galetić, L. (2011). Organizacija velikih poduzeća. Zagreb: Sinergija, p.103
8. Heineman, P. (1995). History of Temperament and Temperament Theory. [online] Person-
ality Project. Available at: http://personality-project.org/others/heineman/HISTORY.HTM
9. Hernaus, T. (2006).Transformacija klasične organizacije u organizaciju orijentiranu na
poslovne procese. MPhil. Faculty of Economics Zagreb. Available at: http://web.efzg.hr/ 14
20na%20poslovne%20procese.pdf [Accessed: 04.03.2017].
10. Kolaković, M. (2003). Teorija intelektualnog kapitala. Ekonomski pregled, [online], 54
(11-12) pp. 925-944. Available at: https://www.google.com/url? sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwjn7o2I-fPaAh- XM16QKHQwGC58QFjAAegQIABAn&url=https%3A%2F%2Fhrcak.srce.hr%2Ffile%2 F40500&usg=AOvVaw2ZBINlrmEw7gkNrbMNY4A4 [Accessed: 08.03.2017.]
11. Leavitt, H. J. (2003). Why Hierarchies Thrive. Harvard Business Review, [online] Vol. 81, 3, pp.102. Available at: https://hbr.org/2003/03/why-hierarchies-thrive [Accessed: 06.03.2017].
12. Nobilo, I. (2017). Marketing je žensko?! In Magazin, [online]. Available at: http:// www.inmagazin.net/ivana-nobilo-marketing-je-zensko/ [Accessed: 19.03.2017].
13. Ordanini, A., Dedrick, J. and Kraemer, K.L. (2006). Medion: The “Orchestrator” Business Model. [online] UC Irvine: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organi- zations. Available at: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3m7659m2#page-8 [Accessed: 05.03.2017].
14. Tenner, A.R. and De Toro, I.J. (1996). Process Redesign: The Implementation Guide For Managers. New Jersey, NY: Prentice Hall, New Jersey, p.14.
15. Žugaj,M., Šehanović, J. and Cingula,M.(2004). Organizacija. Varaždin: TIVA Tiskara
More Blog article for you