Archive for the ‘Just-In-Time lessons’ Category

Two PR Benefits of a Money Back Guarantee Policy

Came across this letter sent in to Straits Times (27 Dec) about Botak Jones, the restaurant that serves ‘damn good American food’. The letter reminds me once again how easy it really is to build an authentic business and in so doing win the admiration of our customers. What better way to build customer loyalty!

Lessons we can all learn from this:

Consumers love to deal with authentic business. One that has a ‘heart’. To be an authentic business, all you really need is (a)passion for your business and (b)to provide service with sincerity. When what you delivered is below expectation, like what happened to Edwin Neo in the letter, then let your sincerity guide you to take the necessary action. 

If you are proud of the quality of food (or any other product) that you sell, it makes complete sense to provide a complete refund and, like what Botak Jones did, take a step further and give them something better at no charge.

Unfortunately, from my interaction with many business owners in Sg, a complete refund and free replacement is such a bizarre concept! They are very resistant to implementing a money back guarantee policy. I find this strange.

Two PR benefits of a money back guarantee policy

When you offer a guarantee like what Botak Jones does, then

1. it lowers the risk to the customers and therefore they are more likely to buy your product than your closest competitor

2. the bad experience of getting a bad product/experience will be downplayed by the sincerity of your response. Customers will more likely to say good things about your company despite the bad experience.

I understand that many business owners in Sg are too afraid that customers will take advantage of their money back guarantee and that their profit margin will be lowered.

People are generally nice and sensible. Customers who exploit money back guarantees are always in the minority. If you experience such a customer, would you want to hold on to him? I will rather drop him and never deal with him again.

As for lowering profit margin, this can only happen if a significant percentage of your customers are asking for refund. If this happen then all signs points to a poor service/product quality. It’s time to do a business review or drop the product altogether.

 

I managed to get my hands on Botak Jones’ brochures. I was not surprised to see them proclaiming their guarantee. The owner even wrote a personal letter to the reader and signs it off! How nice! What an easy way to show their sincerity and providing “damn good food”. I bet he didn’t need to pay branding consultants to do that. It’s just common sense.

 

Your comments please:

What is your opinion on money back guarantee? Is it worth while? Is it effective in fostering a good reputation for business?

DBS bank in a sticky PR situation

DBS apparently have irked the gay community in Singapore because it’s CSR programme involved donating “a sum of their credit cardholders’ spending to support a children and learning project [to] Focus on the Family (FOTF)”. According to Trevvy.com, asia’s largest GBLT portal, FOTF is an anti gay organisation.

It reported that “FOTF is a local offshoot of the US organization of the same name, known for its strong anti-gay stance and programmes. FOTF regards homosexuality as a sinful moral choice and psychological problem. FOTF in Singapore promoted the activities of Liberty League, which describes queer sexuality with terms like “sexual brokenness” and “addiction and abuse”.”

From DBS’s point of view ”FOTF is a non religious and non political organisation. It is a voluntary welfare organisation supported and endorsed by the National Family Council and the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports in Singapore.”

DBS spokesperson told Trevvy that,

“In line with DBS’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts that are geared towards supporting children and learning, several welfare organisations that support similar causes were shortlisted. Focus on the Family (FOTF) is a voluntary welfare organisation (VWO) endorsed by the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports. Further, the funds DBS contributes will be directed specifically towards building a new learning centre, scheduled to open next March, for children with various learning disabilities. As this ties in with the Bank’s CSR efforts to empower children through learning, we decided to pick FOTF as our beneficiary for credit card spend this Christmas. It is not the intention of the Bank to discriminate against any group through the choice of FOTF as our beneficiary.”

For full article click here.

One Trevvy member’s comment sums up the general sentiment on the issue. Other’s were less polite…

Lately DBS has been doing almost nothing right. Just look at the way they handle the DBS High Notes customers and then their Big Retrenchment Exercise without consultation with their union. They came accross as truly heartless. Labour Minister, Lim Swee Say, one of the most effective minister we have, is superb in handling the matter and giving them a good lecture.

I am utterly dissappointed with the higher management and Board of Directors of DBS. They are all for money without social conscience, totally insensitive to human concerns.

Any form of discrimination in today’s modern society context is disgusting and inexcusable, be it Race, Religion, Sex or Sexual Orientation. Only the weird, the idiotic and the people without conscience still discriminate openly or as a group. In the states, they called these group of people committing “organised crime” against humanity.

 

Lesson for us:

When picking a Corporate Social Responsibility programme, it is good to check how our target consumers will react to it. True enough we cant please everyone, but in the era of Web 2.0, we cant always be happy with focussing on the majority demographic/psychographic, we should also take note of which category of customers who are loudest. On the www, news travel faster than the speed of thought.

Years to build credibility, one flight to tear it down

Friday, 21 Nov: Reuters/ST reported:

Chief executives (CEOs) from General Motors (GM), Ford Motor and Chrysler on Wednesday pleaded for US$25 billion (S$38.2 billion) in federal assistance to help pay their suppliers, workers and other expenses at a time when car sales have plunged along with a souring economy.

But sceptical lawmakers blasted them for flying private jets to Washington and failing to make personal sacrifices in exchange for federal assistance…..Even Democrats who said they were sympathetic to the carmakers’ plight expressed frustration that the executives used private jets, while professing ruthless cost-cutting measures…..

[Representative Brad Sherman, a California Democrat said] ’I also, though, must recognise that you’re in trouble mostly because of the economic downturn.’ Mr Sherman asked the CEOs if they were willing to sell their jets on Wednesday and fly back to Detroit on a commercial flight.

‘Let the record show no hands went up,’ he said.

 

Silly CEO’s! Going begging in private jets. Have they lost touch of reality? Would you give your pennies to a beggar in designer dress or even with just a handphone in hand? 

Lesson for us:

The CEO/director is the face of a company, what he does (or doesnt do) will affect the credibility of the company’s perception negatively and lower its branding. But you don’t need a PR genius to tell you that, do you?

Is it so difficult to apologise?

Yet another person writes in to Straits Times today about the lack of acknowledgement of accountability, but now it’s targeted at the government.

Town Council lost a few million dollars to bad investment by DBS and typically, they scrambled to offer logical explanations just to prove that it is a reasonable mistake on their part.

ST reported on 19 Nov:

EIGHT town councils (TC) run by the People’s Action Party have about $16 million invested in troubled structured products.The lion’s share of $12 million is from two TCs: Holland-Bukit Panjang ($8 million) and Pasir Ris-Punggol ($4 million).

The products include Minibonds linked to bankrupt US investment bank Lehman Brothers and the now worthless Merrill Lynch Jubilee Series 3 LinkEarner Notes.

Dr Teo Ho Pin, chairman of the Holland-Bukit Panjang TC as well as coordinating chairman for the 14 PAP town councils, disclosed this yesterday……The 14 TCs ‘do not have significant investments’ in the troubled products, he said. The $16 million is 0.8 per cent of all their funds available for investment. In Holland-Bukit Panjang, $8 million is invested in Minibonds and Jubilee notes. This works out to 6.7 per cent of its investible funds.

It has another $3 million in the potentially-troubling Pinnacle Notes Series 6 arranged by Morgan Stanley.

Pasir Ris-Punggol’s $4 million is 2.6 per cent while in the remaining six TCs, the amount for each is below 1 per cent.

Why can’t town council leaders be gracious and apologise?” asks Adrian Choo in his letter to ST. I second that!

As business owners, we can all learn something from this. An apology is worth more when given without demand.

Are you a business owner? Do you find it difficult to apologise when things go wrong?

What consumers need – A Humane company

Once again another Straits Times reader writes in to say that a little apology would be good for DBS’s reputation. When sh-t happens, apologies! Is that such a difficult thing to do? Do they need consultants to come in and teach them how to apologise like a person of integrity?Didn’t our parents teach us that when we were young?

It’s typical of corporates to pay big money for branding consultants to come up with all their Mission and Values that they so proudly display in a plague. But when things go wrong all the values are nothing but a poster on the wall. No one seems to understand how to put all those expensive values into action. (!!)

I checked DBS website for their list of Values. (Was half expecting it to be 3 values with initials, D,B and S, hahaha). But i didnt find any. So i went into the Community Relations and here’s what DBS thinks of itself:

Our commitment to the community

At DBS, we are committed to be a caring and responsible partner in the communities in which we live and work, by making a significant positive impact on improving the quality of life. We believe in helping people to be the best they can be, so that they, in turn, help themselves achieve their goals….

Well, where is the ‘significant positive impact’? A whole lot of hogwash?

Here is an excerpt from the forum letter (18 Nov’08):

The reputation of DBS Bank has taken a beating, far worse than in 1998. Investors have lost confidence in the bank, its services and its structured products. Some even commented that calls to the bank’s customer service hotline are met with rudeness and abruptness. It is time for damage control. It won’t hurt if DBS Bank apologises and takes a more humane approach to its customers.

Tip:When things go wrong and people get emotionally affected, all the logical explanations in the book will not help calm nerves. Just be human. You don’t need training for that.

Sorry – the hardest word to say?

Ah! Finally a Straits Times reader commented on the most obvious misgiving in the whole DBS High Notes saga – not a word of apology from the organisation. Of course, apology will not bring back the money lost, neither will it lessen the burden brought upon by the worry of a lifetime savings lost. But what it will do is show that DBS as an organisation is human. And like a human, it can and did make mistakes. It will “do the right thing”.

Here’s an excerpt of the letter:

BY SAYING that no one could have anticipated the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the remarks of the DBS Bank chairman (‘We’ve taken a hit but we will overcome’, Wednesday), coming soon after its CEO said the bank would do the ‘right’ thing (‘DBS will do the right thing: CEO’, last Saturday), hoped things would quickly go back to normal. What he is saying effectively is that the Lehman fiasco is unfortunate, no one saw it coming, so let us all charge everything to experience and start anew.This is like a doctor saying he never expected a patient with signs of high cholesterol and hypertension to expire any time soon.

As experienced money handlers, banks have on their payroll experts who do nothing but watch the financial market for signs that will point them to pots of gold and steer them clear of impending danger. In their quest for one-upmanship, fund managers and distributors do their rounds of due diligence, and cover their backs with all the legal ‘eventualities’ so nothing will go wrong….

….Unlike Japan, we do not expect chairmen or CEOs to resign just to make a wrong turn go away. If we cannot say sorry with some measure of grace, perhaps we should let more ‘right’ actions speak for themselves.

I have noticed that Singapore companies have a great difficulty in apologising when things go wrong. Companies may do everything logically expected of it – give good explanation, offer realistic solutions etc. But unfortunately, it has typically been very cold

So if you are business owner, one simple way to set yourself apart from all the other local companies, think about how you can be ‘more human’ towards your consumers. And maybe, just maybe, they will stick with you through thick and thin.

A company’s good reputation is not always build on good action, efficiency and brilliant customer service. It is also build on what happens when things go wrong. When sh-t hits the fan, it doesn’t automatically mean your reputation will go bust. How you respond and react to your customers concerns and needs will determine if your reputation will stay afloat or how deep it will sink. One simple way to make sure it doesnt sink into abysmal depths is an Apology.

Complacency killed the old company

 

The article reported:

COMPLACENCY can set in with age and that appears to be happening with some of Singapore’s more venerable companies when it comes to keeping the brand polished.

The warning signs surfaced when few firms were nominated for the Singapore Prestige Brand Awards (SPBA) in the heritage category – for companies that have been around for more than 30 years.

 

It was not surprising at all that older companies in Singapore are still not very educated on the concepts of branding and how it is so vital to business longevity today. Business is not as usual anymore and somebody must tell these bosses before it is too late.Too late will be when younger companies, despite smaller capital, are able to leverage on the Web 2.0, public relations, guerilla marketing and a whole slew of low-cost-high-impact marketing strategies to build greater customer awareness, maintain a sense of ‘updatedness’ that relates well with the new generation of well-travelled, savvy, global thinking customers. 

“But, we have always done it this way” is just not enough anymore. 

Gone are the days where you can market products with brands like “Mother and Son” , “Volleyball Players” etc. Even “Axe” oil brand worked very hard to stay relevant. The cluttered marketplace of today alone is enough reason to drown such brands out.

Business owners of established brands need to re-look at their customer psychographic. They will probably get a shock at how much these customers have changed in their buying decision making.

 

Mr Chan Chong Beng, chairman of the SPBA organising committee that handed out the awards last night, told The Straits Times: ‘What is quite sad is that for the heritage award, there seems to be a lack of response.

‘A lot of these older companies – they think they have already built a good brand and they are established already, so there’s no need to relook what they have done.’

Mr Chan cautioned that if such firms fail to remember that they need to keep building up their brands, newer companies will soon overtake them.

 

 

Wake up wake up old businesses. The world is changing….

Olympian PR bout under way in Washington

Associated Press

26 July 08

By FOSTER KLUG

WASHINGTON (AP) — In an air-conditioned room in the Chinese Embassy, a vice minister from Beijing chastises Americans for their “very limited” understanding of violent anti-government protests in Tibet.

Hours later, hundreds of supporters of the banned-in-China Falun Gong spiritual movement kneel in the hot sun near the U.S. Capitol as lawmakers and activists rail against what they say are Chinese atrocities.

The Olympic Games begin in Beijing on Aug. 8, but already the competition to sway public opinion in the United States is heating up between anti-China activists and Chinese authorities. It is transforming the run-up to the global sports gathering into a public relations marathon in which China’s national pride is pitted against claims that Beijing abuses its citizens and unquestioningly supports nefarious governments.

Once slow to address criticism, China has responded aggressively to what it sees as unjust condemnation by Western media, rights groups and officials that could tarnish the Olympics. An increasingly media-savvy Chinese Embassy has held briefings meant to provide China’s point of view on contentious issues in the news. Ministers and academics have been flown in from China for news conferences and to meet with U.S. officials and lawmakers.

Meanwhile, China’s opponents have been relentless. Uighurs, Tibetans, Falun Gong practitioners, activists for Darfur and Myanmar, and groups championing religious freedom and human rights are all delighted that the Olympics might shine a spotlight on a country they say has failed to follow through on pledges to improve human rights that were included with its bid to host the games.

They have gathered at rallies in Capitol Hill parks and at congressional hearings, where powerful lawmakers, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and celebrities like actor Richard Gere have faulted Chinese rights abuses. At the Falun Gong rally, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, issued a warning to Beijing that has become a popular refrain by China critics in Washington: “The world will be watching.”

For all the celebrity and congressional attention, however, it is unclear how much of a difference the efforts will make.

Ralph A. Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum CSIS think tank, says what will matter more is how China handles any protests at home during the Olympics, when reporters will be searching for signs of dissent. Some sort of protest, he says, “seems inevitable, and this will give China a black eye internationally if it overreacts, as it almost always does.”

In Washington, the Chinese Embassy is working hard to counter criticism ahead of the games.

Spokesman Wang Baodong said it is the embassy’s duty “to try to reach out to various circles of this country, to let them know the whole picture and to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the situation in China.” Wang said that if Americans base their judgment of China only on the criticism of vocal opponents, “they will be misled, because it does not reflect the whole picture.” He added, “The mainstream opinion of the international community is wishing good for the Beijing Olympic Games.”

A large rallying point for protesters in the United States has been China’s tight grip on Tibet, which China has governed since communist troops invaded in the 1950s. China says 22 people died in March anti-government violence; foreign Tibet supporters say many times that number were killed during demonstrations and a subsequent government crackdown.

China also has been criticized for not using its economic leverage to apply more pressure on the Sudanese government to stop violence in Darfur, where more than 300,000 people are said to have died over the past five years.

While some lawmakers are quick to blast China over these and other issues, the Bush administration has been careful not to anger Beijing ahead of the Olympics, wary about running the risk of hindering a host of international efforts the U.S. needs China’s help to solve.

Still, a swirl of activity continues in Washington. On Wednesday, at a House hearing focusing on China “on the eve of the Olympics,” Beijing was criticized for suppressing dissidents and activists. Then, on Thursday, lawmakers on the House foreign affairs panel passed a resolution that calls on China to immediately stop abusing minority rights and to end its support for Myanmar and Sudan so that the games will “take place in an atmosphere that honors the Olympic traditions of freedom and openness.”

Cossa says that, with the protests and the scrutiny it is facing as the Olympics approach, “one wonders if there is not a certain amount of ‘buyer’s remorse’ in China right now.”