So the Prius has a mind of its own and accelerates out of control. Yesterday my blog was highjacked and redirected all visitors to other sites because of a widget I downloaded from Google. Case in point...both failures were delivered by up to now World Class companies. Toyota earned more accolades for quality than any other car company and Google wrote the book on how to build a global quality company. We consumers trusted both companies above all others in their respective areas of expertise. Trusted that is until we experienced a failure.
Now don’t misunderstand me. I am not equating sticking accelerators that have caused death and destruction to my malware issue. The damage to life and limb from faulty cars is extremely serious. What I would like to discuss is how quickly reputations can change. How instantly Toyota’s seventy years of brand building is wiped out. How two days ago I was singing the praises for Google and today I say how did they let that happen to me? Or another example; how Enron was marked as an evil empire when in reality it was a handful of greedy executives whose bad deeds branded tens of thousands of valued employees and the entire company.
When companies we trust let us down the public’s reaction is usually swift and widespread. We refuse to do business with them. We make them pay for their sins by withholding our dollars. Retribution is meant to be catastrophic and final. Make them pay.
When we lose trust in a company we are done, but when we lose trust in an individual we generally give that person a second chance. In fact, we have built much of our societal values around giving people a second chance. Learn from your mistakes, right?
So, why are we not as forgiving to companies when they make a mistake? What is your opinion? Please post a comment.
In the case of Toyota, it seems they had ample time to respond to these concerns, but chose to sweep them under the rug (or, rather, the floormat).
ReplyDeleteLooking back over the history of their recalls, it seems - at least from an outsiders view - they took the short-term less risky solution of applying a bandaid to a solution that really may have needed a tourniquet. And now they may have lost more than a limb, if we continue that metaphor.
Once the bandaid fell off, there was nothing they could do in terms of PR to restore their lost image in the mind of the consumers. I have no doubt if they had a time machine they would have been more aggresive in being upfront about this and proactive - unfortunately for them - its too late.
So I guess another take-home on this beyond the emphemeral nature of brand and goodwill -- is the value of not letting the people who run the actuarial tables run your PR strategy - but rather, to assume the worst and... if necessary... grab the tourniquet early.
On a sidebar, I received on my most recent Honda loan statement a "transpromo" ad, highlighting safety as Honda's #1 priority. The additional take home on this: never underestimate the extent to which your competitors will pile on if you do slip up!
-steve
Steve,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your "triage" concering Toyota's self-inflicted wounds. I think you nailed it on two accounts. The first is: Timing is everything when it comes to crises management. An appology is accepted or rejected primarily on sincerity. A delayed response to an incident as impactful as what Toyota has on its plate showed total lack of sincerity/concern for its customers.
The second point you made is equally as valid which is: When bad things happen...don't listen to the "bean counters".
All lessons well stated. Thank you Steve.