
Dell Computer, in my opinion is doing a good job of turning around public perceptions essentially by turning around its own behavior with real actions, rather than multi-million dollar ad campaigns. I think their blog http://www.direct2dell.com/default.aspx is an essential component of it. But the commitment to repair their oxymoronic support with a $100 million commitment and their recent handling of the battery crisis are also parts.
But where the Hell is Sony (no link available)?
The behemoth consumer electronics company has yet to step forward and say that they are sorry the batteries they sell to other computer companies occasionally and abruptly became consumed in flames.
Why have they not stepped up to say they regret that one of their products when used as directed can result in the death or partially singed appendages? They have not publicly owned up to the fact that their business partners have suffered a costly embarrassment because of their trusted relationship.
Since they have been very close to mute on this subject, I can only speculate, which is precisely what I’ll do here. Please keep in mind that the following scenario is solely a product of my imagination. It could be almost as wrong as when I wrote in my former other blog that George Bush had zero chance to be reelected.
Sony, like a great many in the computer industry got surprised a couple of years back when sales of notebook computers began to exceed expectations. Like most global manufacturers, they produce product based on projections. They suddenly were blessed with the problem of having to ramp up fast.
We’ve all been there. There’s a business opportunity. You weren’t ready, but you shake it out and you get ready. In the case of mass production that means you cut corners. Frequently the easiest corner to round out just a tad is quality control. It was not oversight. It was a calculation done by a risk analyst who looked at the situation and determined that so many hours could be saved and so much more product could be delivered and so much revenue could be realized if we just allowed the probability of a battery exploding to rise b maybe 2-3 percentage points.
Some executive decision maker at Sony weighed the pros and cons and went with the pros. This was not evil or terribly callous. It was calculated and the decision put people at risk.
My guess is that the decision maker in one way or another has realized a downturn in his career path. In fact if Sony announced that the guy has decided to leave the company to dedicate more time to gardening, I would think more highly of the company. I imagine other employees in this classically top-down enterprise would get a message that lowering the cost of goods sold by raising the threat to human safety is just not the Sony way.
But since I have not heard Sony speak on this subject, then I have to wonder if maybe it is indeed the Sony way.
Anyone who has ever dabbled in the communications industry knows the scenario. Something awful happens, a drunken sea captain ground an oil tanker that should have had a double hull and causes an environmental disaster. Some nutcase puts poison into a Tylenol bottle. An organic farmer grows spinach that is somehow infected with sometimes deadly Ecolli bacteria.
The lawyers sit on one side of the table the marketing folk on the other. At the head of the table is the CEO and at the foot the CFO. The communications folk say you have to apologize. You have to tell people you’re sorry they almost got killed or in some cases actually did. You have to send the entire executive team up to Alaska to have the CEO video-taped in rubber boots helping to clean off the oil soaked birds amid the dying fish
The lawyers stare at the marketing people as if they were addressing a toddler with a learning disability. If you say you’re sorry, you are implying culpability. To do so would increase the possibility of lawsuits.
The discussion goes on for a while. Tempers flare. The conversation starts getting circular. At some point, all eyes turn to the CEO, who is looking at the CFO.
What happens next can go either way. The decision will paint or taint the brand for years to come. I buy Tylenol. I don’t buy Exxon gas, even though the company seems to do just fine without my support. I never eat at Jack in the Box, which isn’t a big deal because I rarely ever have.
But I imagine there are lots of people like me and I would guess that blog conversations may increase this sort of buyer decision making.
I think I know which side of the table the Sony decision maker listened to. Maybe the marketing folk never even got a hearing. I wouldn’t know. Sony is a very private company.
The funny thing for me is that our next big household expense will probably be an HDTV, once I figure out the LCD v Plasma issues. There is a very nice Sony store in the Stanford Mall where I sometimes shop. I jus spent an hour getting educated by a very nice Sony sales guy.
But all things considered, I think I’ll go with another brand.