Guide To The Employees First, Customers Second Theory

Share This Post

In the world of business, there’s a new and exciting idea that’s changing the way companies operate. It’s called the “Employees First, Customers Second” theory.

This theory says that instead of always putting customers first, companies should focus on taking care of their employees’ happiness and well-being.

By doing this, organisations can achieve long-term success and create a positive work environment. When employees feel valued and empowered, they become more dedicated and productive. As a result, customers end up being more satisfied, loyal, and happy with the company’s products or services.

In this guide, we’ll explore the main principles of the “Employees First, Customers Second” theory and learn about the strategies that businesses can use to make their employees thrive. By following this approach, companies can provide exceptional customer experiences and grow sustainably.

Understanding the “employees first, customers second” theory

The “Employee-First, Customer-Second” theory challenges conventional wisdom by asserting that happy and engaged employees are more likely to deliver superior customer service. When employees feel valued, supported, and empowered, they are motivated to go the extra mile to satisfy customers.

This theory embodies the idea that a positive internal work environment directly influences external customer experiences.

How employee satisfaction impacts customer loyalty

Employee satisfaction plays a crucial role in shaping customer loyalty. When employees are content and engaged in their roles, they are more likely to deliver exceptional customer experiences.

Satisfied employees are motivated to go the extra mile to understand and fulfil customer needs, resulting in positive interactions and memorable service. They become brand ambassadors, exuding genuine enthusiasm and passion for the company’s products or services, which customers can easily pick up on.

Moreover, when employees feel valued and supported by their organisation, they are more likely to establish strong connections with customers, fostering trust and loyalty.

On the other hand, dissatisfied employees may convey negative emotions or indifference, leading to subpar customer interactions and ultimately negatively affecting customer loyalty.

By prioritising employee satisfaction, businesses can create a virtuous cycle where happy employees at work, lead to satisfied customers, who, in turn, contribute to the company’s growth and success through repeat business and positive word-of-mouth recommendations.

Understanding employee satisfaction and work-life balance

Employee satisfaction and work-life balance are deeply interconnected aspects that significantly influence the overall well-being and productivity of individuals within an organisation. When employees experience a healthy work-life balance, where their professional demands harmoniously coexist with personal and family commitments, they are more likely to feel content and fulfilled in their roles.

Achieving this balance allows employees to allocate time and energy to both work-related tasks and personal activities, fostering a sense of control over their lives. In turn, this contributes to reduced stress levels and an enhanced ability to cope with workplace challenges.

Moreover, a positive work-life balance is closely linked to employee satisfaction. When employees feel supported in achieving their personal goals and maintaining their well-being, they are more likely to be engaged and committed to their work.

This commitment positively impacts their performance, leading to increased productivity and efficiency. Employees who experience satisfaction and fulfilment at work are also more likely to stay loyal to the organisation, reducing turnover rates and associated recruitment costs.

Employers play a crucial role in promoting work-life balance and employee satisfaction. By offering flexible work arrangements, encouraging open communication, and fostering a supportive work culture, organisations can empower their employees to strike a balance between their personal and professional lives.

Investing in employee well-being initiatives, such as wellness programmes and stress management resources, further reinforces the importance of work-life balance and its positive effects on job satisfaction.

Strategies to maintain work-life balance

Strategies for achieving work-life balance are essential for maintaining overall well-being and ensuring that both personal and professional aspects of life are adequately nurtured. There are some effective strategies to help individuals achieve a healthier work-life balance. These include:

Set priorities

Clearly define your priorities both at work and in your personal life. Identify what truly matters to you and allocate time and effort accordingly.

Establish boundaries

Create clear boundaries between work and personal time. Avoid bringing work home or engaging in personal activities during work hours.

Learn to say no

Understand your limits and be comfortable saying no to excessive work demands or social commitments that may interfere with your well-being.

Manage your time wisely

Practise effective time management to maximise productivity during work hours, leaving room for personal and family time.

Utilise flexible work arrangements

If possible, explore options for flexible work arrangements, such as telecommuting or flexible hours, to accommodate personal needs.

Delegate and seek support

Delegate tasks at work when appropriate, and seek support from family, friends, or colleagues to ease the burden of responsibilities.

Prioritise self-care

Make self-care a priority by engaging in activities that promote physical and mental well-being, such as exercise, meditation, or hobbies.

Unplug from technology

Limit screen time and disconnect from work emails and social media during personal time to avoid burnout and promote relaxation.

Schedule quality family time

Set aside dedicated time to spend with family and loved ones without distractions from work or electronic devices.

Take regular breaks

Incorporate short breaks throughout the workday to refresh your mind and avoid feeling overwhelmed.

Plan vacations and time off

Utilise your vacation days and take time off to recharge and rejuvenate, even if it’s just a staycation.

Practise mindfulness

Be present in the moment and practise mindfulness to reduce stress and enhance your overall well-being.

Communicate with your employer

If work demands are consistently overwhelming, communicate openly with your employer about potential adjustments to your workload or responsibilities.

Seek work-life integration

Find ways to integrate work and personal activities where possible, such as exercising during lunch breaks or attending family events virtually.

Evaluate and adjust

Regularly assess your work-life balance and be willing to adjust your strategies as needed to maintain equilibrium.

Ayurveda sleep aids can play a vital role in maintaining work-life balance by promoting restful sleep, rejuvenating the mind and body, and reducing stress levels. These natural remedies help individuals attain a more balanced and energised state, enhancing their productivity and overall well-being and thereby supporting a harmonious integration of work and personal life.

Remember that work-life balance is a continuous journey and may require ongoing adjustments. By proactively implementing these strategies and nurturing a sense of balance, individuals can lead healthier, more fulfilling lives both at work and beyond.

Why the “employees first, customers second” theory is a powerful business strategy

The “Employees First, Customers Second” theory is a powerful business strategy because it positively affects how successful a company is. By putting employees’ well-being and happiness first, businesses create a good work environment where employees feel engaged, motivated, and productive.

Happy and empowered employees are more likely to understand and meet customer needs, making customers happier and more loyal. This approach also helps companies keep their employees for longer, reducing costs and keeping valuable knowledge in the company.

When employees feel valued and supported, they become advocates for the company, promoting it with their enthusiasm and dedication. Investing in employee development and recognition programmes also helps build loyalty and commitment in the team, leading to better customer experiences.

This strategy has a ripple effect, resulting in improved customer loyalty, positive word-of-mouth, and steady business growth.

In the end, the “Employees First, Customer Second” theory creates a win-win situation where motivated employees drive customer satisfaction and loyalty, ensuring the company’s long-term success in a competitive market.

Benefits of prioritising employees first

Putting employees first isn’t just a gesture; it’s a strategy for success! Here are the incredible benefits of prioritising the team:

Enhanced employee productivity

Employees who feel cared for and respected are more productive and efficient in their roles. They are eager to contribute their best efforts, leading to improved organisational productivity and effectiveness.

Increased employee retention

Focusing on employee well-being and professional growth fosters a sense of loyalty and commitment. As a result, there is likely to be an increase in the employee retention rate for the long term, reducing turnover costs and maintaining institutional knowledge.

Improved customer loyalty

Satisfied and engaged employees tend to provide better customer service, leading to higher customer satisfaction and loyalty. Loyal customers are more likely to become brand advocates, promoting the company through word-of-mouth and online reviews.

Innovation and creativity

Empowered employees feel encouraged to share their ideas and insights. This promotes a culture of innovation and creativity within the organisation, leading to the development of new products or services that better cater to customer needs.

Real-World Case Studies

Zappos: A success story based on making customers happy

Zappos is a popular online store for shoes and clothing known for its excellent customer service. They believe that taking care of their employees is the key to providing great service to customers. The company focuses on finding the right people to work with them, encourages employees to be creative, and gives them extensive training.

As a result, the team is motivated and genuinely cares about customers, leading to loyal customers who tell others about their positive experiences.

Southwest Airlines: Putting employees first in the sky

Southwest Airlines is a highly successful airline that customers love. Their secret lies in empowering and valuing their employees. They create a fun and friendly workplace, encourage teamwork, and offer great benefits.

As a result, the airline’s employees are positive and dedicated, which translates into fantastic customer service. Customers appreciate this and stay loyal to the airline.

HCL Technologies

Under the leadership of Vineet Nayar, HCL Technologies adopted the “Employees First, Customers Second” philosophy. They launched the “Employee First, Customer Second” (EFCS) programme, providing a platform for employees to voice their opinions, ideas, and concerns.

This approach led to significant improvements in employee engagement, customer satisfaction, and revenue growth.

In Summary

The “Employees First, Customers Second” theory brings a significant change to modern business practises. Organisations are realising how important it is to prioritise employee well-being and empowerment to achieve happy customers and long-term growth.

When employees feel engaged and satisfied, they become the driving force behind outstanding customer experiences, rewriting the old rules of business. To create a positive work culture, companies invest in employee feedback, clear communication, recognition, and development programmes.

As we finish this guide, it’s clear that this approach has great benefits. When employees are central to decision-making, they work hard to understand and meet customer needs, leading to loyal and happy customers.

This is not just a passing trend; it’s a powerful strategy that fosters a harmonious workplace, keeps employees happy, and improves productivity. Let’s confidently embrace this new era where businesses put employees first, knowing it will lead to delighted customers and long-lasting success.

The journey to this transformative business approach awaits, and it’s up to us to seize its potential and create a path to prosperity.

About the Author

Kanika is an observant author with a deep passion for exploring nature and superfoods. Her insightful writings challenge and enlighten readers, captivating them with her unique perspective on the world. She is always seeking new ways to learn and grow, and her work is a reflection of her curiosity and love of life.

The post Guide To The Employees First, Customers Second Theory appeared first on The 6Q Blog.

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Get updates and learn from the best

More To Explore


Best of both worlds: Achieving scalability and quality in text clustering

Posted by Sara Ahmadian and Mehran Kazemi, Research Scientists, Google Research

Clustering is a fundamental, ubiquitous problem in data mining and unsupervised machine learning, where the goal is to group together similar items. The standard forms of clustering are metric clustering and graph clustering. In metric clustering, a given metric space defines distances between data points, which are grouped together based on their separation. In graph clustering, a given graph connects similar data points through edges, and the clustering process groups data points together based on the connections between them. Both clustering forms are particularly useful for large corpora where class labels can’t be defined. Examples of such corpora are the ever-growing digital text collections of various internet platforms, with applications including organizing and searching documents, identifying patterns in text, and recommending relevant documents to users (see more examples in the following posts: clustering related queries based on user intent and practical differentially private clustering).

The choice of text clustering method often presents a dilemma. One approach is to use embedding models, such as BERT or RoBERTa, to define a metric clustering problem. Another is to utilize cross-attention (CA) models, such as PaLM or GPT, to define a graph clustering problem. CA models can provide highly accurate similarity scores, but constructing the input graph may require a prohibitive quadratic number of inference calls to the model. On the other hand, a metric space can efficiently be defined by distances of embeddings produced by embedding models. However, these similarity distances are typically of substantial lower-quality compared to the similarity signals of CA models, and hence the produced clustering can be of much lower-quality.

An overview of the embedding-based and cross-attention–based similarity scoring functions and their scalability vs. quality dilemma.

Motivated by this, in “KwikBucks: Correlation Clustering with Cheap-Weak and Expensive-Strong Signals”, presented at ICLR 2023, we describe a novel clustering algorithm that effectively combines the scalability benefits from embedding models and the quality from CA models. This graph clustering algorithm has query access to both the CA model and the embedding model, however, we apply a budget on the number of queries made to the CA model. This algorithm uses the CA model to answer edge queries, and benefits from unlimited access to similarity scores from the embedding model. We describe how this proposed setting bridges algorithm design and practical considerations, and can be applied to other clustering problems with similar available scoring functions, such as clustering problems on images and media. We demonstrate how this algorithm yields high-quality clusters with almost a linear number of query calls to the CA model. We have also open-sourced the data used in our experiments.

The clustering algorithm

The KwikBucks algorithm is an extension of the well-known KwikCluster algorithm (Pivot algorithm). The high-level idea is to first select a set of documents (i.e., centers) with no similarity edge between them, and then form clusters around these centers. To obtain the quality from CA models and the runtime efficiency from embedding models, we introduce the novel combo similarity oracle mechanism. In this approach, we utilize the embedding model to guide the selection of queries to be sent to the CA model. When given a set of center documents and a target document, the combo similarity oracle mechanism outputs a center from the set that is similar to the target document, if present. The combo similarity oracle enables us to save on budget by limiting the number of query calls to the CA model when selecting centers and forming clusters. It does this by first ranking centers based on their embedding similarity to the target document, and then querying the CA model for the pair (i.e., target document and ranked center), as shown below.

A combo similarity oracle that for a set of documents and a target document, returns a similar document from the set, if present.

We then perform a post processing step to merge clusters if there is a strong connection between two of them, i.e., when the number of connecting edges is higher than the number of missing edges between two clusters. Additionally, we apply the following steps for further computational savings on queries made to the CA model, and to improve performance at runtime:

We leverage query-efficient correlation clustering to form a set of centers from a set of randomly selected documents instead of selecting these centers from all the documents (in the illustration below, the center nodes are red).

We apply the combo similarity oracle mechanism to perform the cluster assignment step in parallel for all non-center documents and leave documents with no similar center as singletons. In the illustration below, the assignments are depicted by blue arrows and initially two (non-center) nodes are left as singletons due to no assignment.

In the post-processing step, to ensure scalability, we use the embedding similarity scores to filter down the potential mergers (in the illustration below, the green dashed boundaries show these merged clusters).

Illustration of progress of the clustering algorithm on a given graph instance.


We evaluate the novel clustering algorithm on various datasets with different properties using different embedding-based and cross-attention–based models. We compare the clustering algorithm’s performance with the two best performing baselines (see the paper for more details):

To evaluate the quality of clustering, we use precision and recall. Precision is used to calculate the percentage of similar pairs out of all co-clustered pairs and recall is the percentage of co-clustered similar pairs out of all similar pairs. To measure the quality of the obtained solutions from our experiments, we use the F1-score, which is the harmonic mean of the precision and recall, where 1.0 is the highest possible value that indicates perfect precision and recall, and 0 is the lowest possible value that indicates if either precision or recall are zero. The table below reports the F1-score for Kwikbucks and various baselines in the case that we allow only a linear number of queries to the CA model. We show that Kwikbucks offers a substantial boost in performance with a 45% relative improvement compared to the best baseline when averaging across all datasets.

The figure below compares the clustering algorithm’s performance with baselines using different query budgets. We observe that KwikBucks consistently outperforms other baselines at various budgets.

A comparison of KwikBucks with top-2 baselines when allowed different budgets for querying the cross-attention model.


Text clustering often presents a dilemma in the choice of similarity function: embedding models are scalable but lack quality, while cross-attention models offer quality but substantially hurt scalability. We present a clustering algorithm that offers the best of both worlds: the scalability of embedding models and the quality of cross-attention models. KwikBucks can also be applied to other clustering problems with multiple similarity oracles of varying accuracy levels. This is validated with an exhaustive set of experiments on various datasets with diverse properties. See the paper for more details.


This project was initiated during Sandeep Silwal’s summer internship at Google in 2022. We would like to express our gratitude to our co-authors, Andrew McCallum, Andrew Nystrom, Deepak Ramachandran, and Sandeep Silwal, for their valuable contributions to this work. We also thank Ravi Kumar and John Guilyard for assistance with this blog post.


Zero-shot adaptive prompting of large language models

Posted by Xingchen Wan, Student Researcher, and Ruoxi Sun, Research Scientist, Cloud AI Team

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) are very promising as reflected in their capability for general problem-solving in few-shot and zero-shot setups, even without explicit training on these tasks. This is impressive because in the few-shot setup, LLMs are presented with only a few question-answer demonstrations prior to being given a test question. Even more challenging is the zero-shot setup, where the LLM is directly prompted with the test question only.

Even though the few-shot setup has dramatically reduced the amount of data required to adapt a model for a specific use-case, there are still cases where generating sample prompts can be challenging. For example, handcrafting even a small number of demos for the broad range of tasks covered by general-purpose models can be difficult or, for unseen tasks, impossible. For example, for tasks like summarization of long articles or those that require domain knowledge (e.g., medical question answering), it can be challenging to generate sample answers. In such situations, models with high zero-shot performance are useful since no manual prompt generation is required. However, zero-shot performance is typically weaker as the LLM is not presented with guidance and thus is prone to spurious output.

In “Better Zero-shot Reasoning with Self-Adaptive Prompting”, published at ACL 2023, we propose Consistency-Based Self-Adaptive Prompting (COSP) to address this dilemma. COSP is a zero-shot automatic prompting method for reasoning problems that carefully selects and constructs pseudo-demonstrations for LLMs using only unlabeled samples (that are typically easy to obtain) and the models’ own predictions. With COSP, we largely close the performance gap between zero-shot and few-shot while retaining the desirable generality of zero-shot prompting. We follow this with “Universal Self-Adaptive Prompting“ (USP), accepted at EMNLP 2023, in which we extend the idea to a wide range of general natural language understanding (NLU) and natural language generation (NLG) tasks and demonstrate its effectiveness.

Prompting LLMs with their own outputs

Knowing that LLMs benefit from demonstrations and have at least some zero-shot abilities, we wondered whether the model’s zero-shot outputs could serve as demonstrations for the model to prompt itself. The challenge is that zero-shot solutions are imperfect, and we risk giving LLMs poor quality demonstrations, which could be worse than no demonstrations at all. Indeed, the figure below shows that adding a correct demonstration to a question can lead to a correct solution of the test question (Demo1 with question), whereas adding an incorrect demonstration (Demo 2 + questions, Demo 3 with questions) leads to incorrect answers. Therefore, we need to select reliable self-generated demonstrations.

Example inputs & outputs for reasoning tasks, which illustrates the need for carefully designed selection procedure for in-context demonstrations (MultiArith dataset & PaLM-62B model): (1) zero-shot chain-of-thought with no demo: correct logic but wrong answer; (2) correct demo (Demo1) and correct answer; (3) correct but repetitive demo (Demo2) leads to repetitive outputs; (4) erroneous demo (Demo3) leads to a wrong answer; but (5) combining Demo3 and Demo1 again leads to a correct answer.

COSP leverages a key observation of LLMs: that confident and consistent predictions are more likely correct. This observation, of course, depends on how good the uncertainty estimate of the LLM is. Luckily, in large models, previous works suggest that the uncertainty estimates are robust. Since measuring confidence requires only model predictions, not labels, we propose to use this as a zero-shot proxy of correctness. The high-confidence outputs and their inputs are then used as pseudo-demonstrations.

With this as our starting premise, we estimate the model’s confidence in its output based on its self-consistency and use this measure to select robust self-generated demonstrations. We ask LLMs the same question multiple times with zero-shot chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting. To guide the model to generate a range of possible rationales and final answers, we include randomness controlled by a “temperature” hyperparameter. In an extreme case, if the model is 100% certain, it should output identical final answers each time. We then compute the entropy of the answers to gauge the uncertainty — the answers that have high self-consistency and for which the LLM is more certain, are likely to be correct and will be selected.

Assuming that we are presented with a collection of unlabeled questions, the COSP method is:

Input each unlabeled question into an LLM, obtaining multiple rationales and answers by sampling the model multiple times. The most frequent answers are highlighted, followed by a score that measures consistency of answers across multiple sampled outputs (higher is better). In addition to favoring more consistent answers, we also penalize repetition within a response (i.e., with repeated words or phrases) and encourage diversity of selected demonstrations. We encode the preference towards consistent, un-repetitive and diverse outputs in the form of a scoring function that consists of a weighted sum of the three scores for selection of the self-generated pseudo-demonstrations.
We concatenate the pseudo-demonstrations into test questions, feed them to the LLM, and obtain a final predicted answer.

Illustration of COSP: In Stage 1 (left), we run zero-shot CoT multiple times to generate a pool of demonstrations (each consisting of the question, generated rationale and prediction) and assign a score. In Stage 2 (right), we augment the current test question with pseudo-demos (blue boxes) and query the LLM again. A majority vote over outputs from both stages forms the final prediction.

COSP focuses on question-answering tasks with CoT prompting for which it is easy to measure self-consistency since the questions have unique correct answers. But this can be difficult for other tasks, such as open-ended question-answering or generative tasks that don’t have unique answers (e.g., text summarization). To address this limitation, we introduce USP in which we generalize our approach to other general NLP tasks:

Classification (CLS): Problems where we can compute the probability of each class using the neural network output logits of each class. In this way, we can measure the uncertainty without multiple sampling by computing the entropy of the logit distribution.
Short-form generation (SFG): Problems like question answering where we can use the same procedure mentioned above for COSP, but, if necessary, without the rationale-generating step.
Long-form generation (LFG): Problems like summarization and translation, where the questions are often open-ended and the outputs are unlikely to be identical, even if the LLM is certain. In this case, we use an overlap metric in which we compute the average of the pairwise ROUGE score between the different outputs to the same query.

Illustration of USP in exemplary tasks (classification, QA and text summarization). Similar to COSP, the LLM first generates predictions on an unlabeled dataset whose outputs are scored with logit entropy, consistency or alignment, depending on the task type, and pseudo-demonstrations are selected from these input-output pairs. In Stage 2, the test instances are augmented with pseudo-demos for prediction.

We compute the relevant confidence scores depending on the type of task on the aforementioned set of unlabeled test samples. After scoring, similar to COSP, we pick the confident, diverse and less repetitive answers to form a model-generated pseudo-demonstration set. We finally query the LLM again in a few-shot format with these pseudo-demonstrations to obtain the final predictions on the entire test set.

Key Results

For COSP, we focus on a set of six arithmetic and commonsense reasoning problems, and we compare against 0-shot-CoT (i.e., “Let’s think step by step“ only). We use self-consistency in all baselines so that they use roughly the same amount of computational resources as COSP. Compared across three LLMs, we see that zero-shot COSP significantly outperforms the standard zero-shot baseline.

USP improves significantly on 0-shot performance. “CLS” is an average of 15 classification tasks; “SFG” is the average of five short-form generation tasks; “LFG” is the average of two summarization tasks. “SFG (BBH)” is an average of all BIG-Bench Hard tasks, where each question is in SFG format.

For USP, we expand our analysis to a much wider range of tasks, including more than 25 classifications, short-form generation, and long-form generation tasks. Using the state-of-the-art PaLM 2 models, we also test against the BIG-Bench Hard suite of tasks where LLMs have previously underperformed compared to people. We show that in all cases, USP again outperforms the baselines and is competitive to prompting with golden examples.

Accuracy on BIG-Bench Hard tasks with PaLM 2-M (each line represents a task of the suite). The gain/loss of USP (green stars) over standard 0-shot (green triangles) is shown in percentages. “Human” refers to average human performance; “AutoCoT” and “Random demo” are baselines we compared against in the paper; and “3-shot” is the few-shot performance for three handcrafted demos in CoT format.

We also analyze the working mechanism of USP by validating the key observation above on the relation between confidence and correctness, and we found that in an overwhelming majority of the cases, USP picks confident predictions that are more likely better in all task types considered, as shown in the figure below.

USP picks confident predictions that are more likely better. Ground-truth performance metrics against USP confidence scores in selected tasks in various task types (blue: CLS, orange: SFG, green: LFG) with PaLM-540B.

Zero-shot inference is a highly sought-after capability of modern LLMs, yet the success in which poses unique challenges. We propose COSP and USP, a family of versatile, zero-shot automatic prompting techniques applicable to a wide range of tasks. We show large improvement over the state-of-the-art baselines over numerous task and model combinations.


This work was conducted by Xingchen Wan, Ruoxi Sun, Hootan Nakhost, Hanjun Dai, Julian Martin Eisenschlos, Sercan Ö. Arık, and Tomas Pfister. We would like to thank Jinsung Yoon Xuezhi Wang for providing helpful reviews, and other colleagues at Google Cloud AI Research for their discussion and feedback.

Do You Want To Boost Your Business?

drop us a line and keep in touch