Tag Archives: poor leadership

The Inept Organization: Weak Leadership as the Culprit

by James D. Roumeliotis

Embarrasing Moment Photo - Pants down

How often do you come across a company, either as a consumer or at a business relationship level, and realize how frustrating it is to deal with?

To understand and penetrate the corporate governing structure and “culture”, you need look no further than the upper echelon of the hierarchical tree. It is here that procedural decisions are shaped and executed. An entity’s leadership is expected to head the enterprise by governing its long-term growth and sustained wealth.
Moreover, there is a constant search for the “right” human resources. Recruited and fresh talent must resemble the leadership in tone and style. Call it the organization’s DNA. Exceptional organizations are good at these types of corporate strategies, thus strengthening performance effectively.

We notice that in certain types of B2B transactions, there can be scope for unscrupulous behavior. One or both parties are tempted by “disservice” during their business exchange. Shortsightedness might lend itself to make this underhanded approach appear “profitable” on paper. Such relationships inevitably end badly because they are not conceived with trust or respect.

Success Breeds Success

Companies that foster the right attitudes and strategies put the firm on track for success. Examining their corporate histories, you can witness a trajectory of growth. They have a tendency to dominate their markets and “win” through competent talent, innovation, and an entrepreneurial mindset within the leadership at the executive level. These choices underscore the prosperity and rapid growth of the institution. An examination of Alphabet (Google) or Facebook shows this quite nicely. They are not built like “traditional” corporations nor do they act like them.

Organizational leadership is accountable for creating value for customers, employees and its owners/investors. When Bill Gates conceived Microsoft, he put the firm on track for providing constituent audiences with what nobody else could provide. Understanding “asset” management in an expanded meaning of the term guaranteed that Microsoft would succeed under Gates stewardship.

The opposite is equally true. When top executives lack knowledge or experience for board positions, they should not be promoted to these leadership roles. Some family owned firms run afoul here and this brings up the issues of sustainability and corporate governance. Another weakness in running an organization, in my view, is pushing for short-term profitability at the expense of solid planning. For example, with large organizations, competence is not the primary value but rather connections, politics, and clever tactics. Such “benefits” can usually compensate for incompetence.

No business can continue to prosper unless it attracts fresh and eager talent. Despite the dilemmas within the financial world, top organizations consistently lure new talent with lucrative compensation packages. It is easier for a firm such as Goldman to tap the “best” because of its reputation, size and success than a small local financial player. When Goldman recruits they know where to look, whether it is Harvard or the London Business School. Prospects will already contain the seeds of the corporate culture in their past. Given the “right” conditions, new talent blossoms. Qualifications are never enough. They are a starting point reinforced by attitude and values. The selection and screening process is designed by HR to weed out inappropriate candidates.

Established software companies’ interview process include quizzing candidates with challenging technical questions. This practice not only assesses problem-solving and knowledge ability, but also explores the ability to perform under pressure, which is a key skill required for software engineers to succeed in their intense work environment.

One thing is firmly certain ─ the best-managed companies have “one” factor in common:
They are constant achievers in their respective industries. These companies exude managerial excellence. Financial performance is the result of this style of management. Consider companies such as Amazon, Apple and Cisco, among others, which thrive and ranked in 2019 by the Drucker Institute as America’s largest publicly traded companies according to Peter Drucker’s principles of effectiveness—“doing the right things well.

Deeds Not Slogans

Companies with inept leadership usually fail in the first year or two, but even established companies can stumble badly when they outgrow the capabilities of the founding team. Research by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics demonstrates that nearly 6/10 businesses shut down within the first 4 years of operation.

To be a successful entrepreneur is not an effortless task. It takes plenty of sacrifice. A new generation of young entrepreneurs think the road is smooth and a fast track to easy wealth. Not everyone will become Jeff Bezos. Obstacles and sacrifice are part of the deal. Harnessing opportunity and overcoming challenges daily to top the competition is constant work. These conditions are true no matter what the sector of business engagement or company size.

Telltale signs of weak organizations can be traced to inept leadership. The following points highlight the deficiencies:
Poor customer service – slow or no customer inquiry replies – abysmal handling of sales and service complaints. Service is portrayed as a reward, not a right or benefit.
No Unique Selling/Value Proposition – Companies need to define and articulate their unique value proposition and deliver on it consistently. Create the platform for sustainable and competitive advantage.
Operational deficiencies – various ailments and no structure
Absence of or very little communication among staff and management – Divisions aren’t well-coordinated and do not function as a team.
No transparency – There is hardly any openness from management.
Unethical practices – short-term selfish objectives in search of market share. Top executives should promote social norms and principles as moral agents.
Lack of proper execution of decisions and with new products/services.
Productivity incentives should be implemented to boost results and employee morale. People must be given a reason to work hard and be efficient.
Creativity is practically non-existent – An absence of innovation and employee empowerment will hurt progress and stifle new ideas.
No clear vision/strategy – there needs to be a strategic vision that reflects a truly unmet need and has the commitment of a dedicated CEO. That means that there is a well-defined target audience with a distinct value position that is differentiated, meaningful, and deliverable.
A weak sales force along with an unattractive compensation plan.
Favoring nepotism and bias – promoting family members over other qualified employees often leads to resentment or, worse, prompts valuable non-family employees to leave the company.
Poor hiring practices – should hire for attitude and train for skills.
Slow/delayed decision-making process – too many layers – overwhelming bureaucratic structure.
High turnover, which leads to poor employee morale, reduced intellectual capital, lower service levels, higher operational costs and decreased productivity.
Management in a state of denial about their organization’s shortcomings – remaining with the dysfunctional status quo
No specific and/or stable channel strategy – Some companies focus on building a product, but don’t think through how to get it into the hands of customers. Even if your product is great, unless you can sell directly, you may be dead in the water without strong channel partners.
The hidden game – corporate politics – power plays by a handful of individuals for their own benefit to the detriment of their colleagues and the company.
Misrepresentation of brand(s) – too much hype – empty promises – not delivering on expectations – leads to dissatisfied clients who will alienate the brand.
Weak financial controls – cash flow dilemmas – over leveraged/undercapitalized (high debt-to-capital ratio) – not reinvesting a certain percentage of profits for future growth.
Absence of sound marketing program(s) and/or brand strategy – A brand is defined by how it behaves, from the products it builds to how it treats its customers, to the suppliers with whom it works.
Growing too fast and not staying on course as the company grows.
Lack or very little employee training & development.
Deficient in control systems – reactive rather than pro-active.
Lack of continuous improvements or complacent.

Top executives need to be accountable to the ownership or Board of Directors – whichever applies, or at least to an outside arm’s length and neutral party such as an adviser who can also play “devil’s advocate” when necessary.

Good Organizations Matter

The way to solve an organizational problem is to confront the structural issues with a moral sense of purpose and ethics. For its clients to receive stellar service, the firm must have its house in order. Besides structure and an efficient operation, employees should be trained and empowered to do their jobs efficiently.

Seth Godin, a renowned marketing strategist, stated succinctly: “If you want to build a caring organization, you need to fill it with caring people and then get out of their way. When your organization punishes people for caring, don’t be surprised when people stop caring. When you free your employees to act like people (as opposed to cogs in a profit-maximizing efficient machine) then the caring can’t help but happen.”

Companies that disrespect their employees and shut-out clients get willfully isolated and have a short life span through an erosion of market share and significant loss of revenue. A company’s goal should place emphasis on serving its people properly and fairly. Higher morale generates higher profits – though occasionally other priorities hinder that objective, for example, self-serving behavior by certain executives.

Enterprises spanning a wide array of industries, have earned distinction as “well-” or “best-” managed” by demonstrating business excellence through a meticulous and independent process that evaluates their management abilities and practices – by focusing on innovation, continuous training, brainstorming and caring for their employees’ well-being – as well as investing in meeting the needs of their clients.

In a nutshell: Well-run companies thrive no matter what by hiring the right people, taking good care of them, listening to customers and never ceasing to innovate and improve.

___________________________________________________

Request your TWO FREE chapters of this popular book with no obligation.

EntrepreneurialEssentials - FrontCover Final

Leave a comment

Filed under 1, Business, business management, Business success, business transparency, business vitality, crisis management, decision making management, effective leadership, entrepreneurship success, inept leadership, leadership, poor leadership, starting a business success

The Notorious Cruise Industry: A Glorified and Reckless Offshore Business

By James D. Roumeliotis

Hiding from the Cruise ship

According to the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA), the world’s largest cruise industry trade organization, the industry transported and hosted 30 million passengers in 2019 worth upwards of $117 billion in 2017. Traffic, since 2009, grew from 17.8 million with an annual growth rate of 5.4%.

Cruise ships, prior to the recent coronavirus pandemic, maintained a degree of glamour and opulence. Slick advertising and marketing projected images of fun and carefree times with a glorified onboard experience ─ a floating and carefree hotel resort. However, the dark side is best described as an industry which is rogue, careless along with insensitive behavior in international waters. According to a Conde Nast Traveler article, despite a relatively good safety record, the four most common cruise ship mishaps (icebergs is not one of them) are: Rough waves, storms, fires and collisions.

For the record, as a former yacht and passenger ship broker, who chartered entire ships to VIPs and for corporate events, this author possesses first-hand experience in the industry.

The Good…

To be fair, the safety aspect of passenger ships (specifically for those carrying more than 12  passengers) is regulated by the IMO (International Maritime Organization) and its convention known as SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea). It regulates basic safety aspects for ships on international voyages such as stability, machinery, electrical installations, fire protection and lifesaving appliances. The main objective of the SOLAS Convention is to specify minimum standards for the construction, equipment and operation of ships. In addition, cruise ships are required to adhere to:

  • MARPOL (short for Maritime Pollution): It is the main international convention aimed at the prevention of pollution from ships caused by operational or accidental causes. It was also adopted at the IMO (International Maritime Organization). For cruise ships it includes pollution by sewage pollution by garbage.
  • Classification Society:  It is a non-governmental organization that establishes and maintains technical standards for the construction and operation of all categories of ships, as well as offshore structures such as an oil platform and offshore platform… in accordance with the published standards. Classification Societies certify that the construction of a ship complies with pertinent standards and perform regular surveys in service to ensure continuing compliance with the mandatory standards. A classification society’s workforce comprises of ship surveyors, mechanical engineers, material engineers, piping engineers, and electrical engineers.

Cruise ship good-ugly montage clips

…The Bad and the Ugly

The best way to describe the typical cruise experience is: cruise ship passengers (or guests as they are normally referred to) get ferried from port-to-port on a floating amusement park. However, as recent events have indicated, cruise ships with their confined spaces and close living quarters are ideal for various diseases including novel viruses such as Covid-19 as they may increase the amount of group contact. In addition, people joining the ship may bring the virus to other passengers and crew. ‘Stranded at sea’: cruise ships around the world are adrift as ports turn them away, read the unflattering headline (March 27, 2020) at The Guardian, an established British daily newspaper.

Passenger ships can also be categorized as high-risk, with excessive sexual assault rates, frequent poisonings, and the ever-present possibility of falling overboard. Cruise ships are also infamous for the environment through their deliberate and/or careless disposal of sewage ─ and air pollution caused by their engines and generators burning away tons of heavy diesel fuel.

Although their head-offices are based in countries such as the U.S., the U.K. and other countries in Europe, cruise lines typically register their ships under so-called “flags of convenience.” The most popular countries with shipping registries include the Bahamas, Panama, Bermuda, Liberia and Malta. Those are chosen for their cheap registration fees, low wages, loose regulations and to take advantage of a taxation loophole that essentially shields them from paying any income tax in the countries the cruise liners are actually based and operate. Although the IMO (International Maritime Organization) makes the international rules that govern shipping, including the sea cruising sector, it has no enforcement power.

As for wages, the stark reality for many cruise ship workers is far from glamour work and pay to match. While the working conditions for officers such as the captain and his lower ranking bridge staff, as well as those working in the shops and casinos are adequate, if not better, the experience of those working in the dining room, in the galley, cleaning rooms, and below deck describes a different story. Those workers are often paid substandard wages, survive on inadequate food, have marginal accommodations ─ and basic medical care for injuries can be scant. Those employees also live under a system that is widespread with abuse and uncertainty. Cruise lines can get away with treating their lowest-paid workers poorly because they recruit them from countries with limited economic opportunities. In other words, people who either don’t know any better and/or see a cruise ship job as a better employment opportunity than what is available in their country.

In March 2019 the cruise ship Viking Sky, with More than 890 people onboard, experienced a loss of engine power off the coast of Norway near Molde. Unable to steer without power, the ship kept getting slammed by extreme waves. Consequently, passengers’ belongings were scattered everywhere in their cabins. The captain declared an emergency. Passengers put on life jackets and went to the muster stations. Eventually, evacuation began. Rescuers worked all night to airlift more than 400 passengers (about half the total) to shore by a fleet of five helicopters flying in the dark, slowly winching people up one-by-one from the heaving ship as the waves crashed and the winds shrieked.  The ship, aided by tow vessels, eventually wobbled into the Norwegian port of Molde freeing the remaining 436 passengers and crew of 458.

In 2013, an engine fire aboard the “Carnival Triumph” left its 4,000 passengers adrift with neither any power, nor running water and scarce food. A year later, Royal Caribbean International was bestowed with the unflattering distinction of breaking the record for the largest number of passengers ill onboard its ship from a norovirus plague — nearly 700 people.

In 2019, the behemoth cruise line Carnival Corporation and its Princess Cruise Lines subsidiary agreed to pay a criminal penalty of $20 million for environmental violations such as dumping plastic waste into the ocean. Princess had previously paid $40 million over other deliberate acts of pollution. Royal Caribbean Cruises, the world’s second largest cruise line, has paid an $18 million fine for illegally dumping a great deal of waste oil and chemicals into U.S. waters from its dry cleaning shops and its printing and photo processing equipment.  Moreover, the crew lied to the U.S. coast guard when asked about the slicks trailing its ships. Other companies have also paid high fines for causing environmental damage.

ONE TIME USE - DO NOT USE

Cruise ships also leave a tremendous amount of environmental footprint. In a year, 100 million gallons of petroleum products from the ships seep into the oceans. Then there’s the air pollution they create. They burn as much fuel as entire small towns and operate on low Sulphur fuel which is 100 times worse than road vehicle diesel.

In June 2019, the 13-deck MSC Opera cruise ship with over 2600 passengers onboard, crashed into a tourist boat and then into a dock in Venice, Italy, due to an engine failure. Video posted to social media showed passengers escaping from the tourist boat and frantically rushing down the dock as the cruise ship swiftly approached them.

Bailout Expectations

Sadly, cruise liners with no obvious plan in place were taken by surprise (reactive vs. proactive). As a result, they mishandled the coronavirus onboard their ships ─ beginning with the outbreak on the Diamond Princess in Yokohama, Japan. Seven hundred people on board were infected with COVID-19 spreading through the ship’s corridors during its two weeks of quarantine, leading to seven deaths. According to passengers aboard the vessels, as well as outcry from health experts, in the weeks following the outbreak major cruise lines missed several opportunities to mitigate the crisis. Furthermore, according to one cruise line spokesperson, to avoid a panic that might collapse the industry, the cruise lines continued to mislead their passengers.

As expected, the news of the Covid-19, especially with many more cruise ships involved, caused a wave of cancellations and stock prices dropped significantly. Shares in Carnival, the world’s largest cruise line with several subsidiary brands in its portfolio, as well as its major competitors Royal Caribbean and Norwegian, have lost more than half of their value thus far this year. To reassure passengers, the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA), which represents 90 percent of cruise liners worldwide, has issued sweeping restrictions and safety measures to be followed on ships. That reactive approach is too little too late and won’t make much of a difference in terms of reassuring booked passengers and potential ones.

The mere talk to inject billions to prop-up the cruise sector devastated by the pandemic, governments need to take this opportunity to come with strings attached such as implementing provisions, and by creating and enforcing legislation on the cruise ship industry to change its intolerable practices. If the industry along with its annoying lobbyists and greedy executives begin to balk, it will be time to take a hatchet and push the repulsive cruise line operators out to sea. Peter DeFazio, a Democrat in the State of Oregon and chairman of the Transportation Committee, firmly declared that he has no desire to bail-out the cruise industry. “They aren’t American,” he said. “They don’t pay taxes in the United States of America. If they want to re-flag their ships and pay U.S. wages and pay U.S. taxes, then maybe.” Other U.S. House Representatives echoed similar sentiments.

Alas, the mischievous cruise industry (the major ones are Royal CaribbeanCarnival Cruise Lines, and Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings) which insists on self-policing yet retains many holes in regulation and insulates itself by registering its ships in foreign countries (i.e. “Flags of convenience”).  Add to that its powerful lobby (spend approximately $3 M annually on lobbying) in the nation’s capital along with strong influence mainly in the tourism-dependent state of Florida.

In the End

The cruise industry has few fans at this time with many more losing interest. In addition, the elderly, are especially steering away of such voyages ─ perhaps for good. According to the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) Global Passenger Report, the median age has been between 60 and 69-year-olds, with a full 19% of cruisers falling under this demographic.

The only exception to the cruise industry worth applauding, with its premium ships, sustainable and exceptional consistent experiences, are the small luxury cruise vessels or boutique ships ─ many which resemble a yacht-like intimate atmosphere with accommodations for between 50 and 600 or so passengers along with a one-to-one ratio of crew members to passengers. Some top rated examples include Ponant Yacht Cruises & Expeditions, Variety Cruises, Seadream Yacht Club, Windstar Cruises, Silversea, Seabourn, and the recent newcomer RitzCarlton with its first-ever yacht christened Evrima accommodating up to 289 guests.

Disappointing pictures of what the mainstream massive cruise ships actually look like in the real world (glamour vs. reality) can be viewed at this link.

For all known illness outbreaks and additional unique news on cruise ships, refer to Cruise Junkie, an online information resource which tracks disasters at sea on the website based on news, passenger, and official accounts.

A full documentary of the cruise ship industry gone awry is linked here.

Finally, for some satire about the cruise industry by HBO comedian Bill Maher, click here for the link to the segment.

______________________________________________

Request your TWO FREE chapters of this popular book with no obligation.

EntrepreneurialEssentials - FrontCover Final

 

Leave a comment

Filed under 1, Business, business management, crisis management, cruise liners, cruise ship industry, cruise ships, Global business, preventing business problems

Unconscious Corporate Leadership: Short-term results-oriented mindset and strategy with negative consequences

By James D. Roumeliotis

Image result for unconscious corporate leadership

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

 

When you are the top executive of a corporation, you are supposedly quite conscious of your business activities. You are also the chief strategic planner and implementer. The path you take the company through can be one the consumer and public in large will either admire and respect or despise and hold in contempt. Good news! A business can do good for the consumer and the ecological footprint while growing the business and increasing profits methodically. A savvy businessperson and executive know how to do this. A disgraceful and incompetent one either has no clue, does not care, or both.

Small to medium sized businesses owned by a person or a family, often since decades, keep seriously in consideration their business and its reputation as their personal honor. They think long term. Unfortunately, at many big companies, such as publicly traded automobile manufacturers, emphasis is mainly on satisfying shareholders through quarterly share prices…whether organically or artificially. Most of the time it’s the latter growth. That’s tremendous pressure on everyone at the helm.

Despicable companies: Prime examples that make you cringe

  • The Boeing brand reputation bruise following its sprint to launch the 737 Max 8 & 9 commercial passenger jets despite its safety and design flaws.

Following two air fatalities in a short period of time along with constant denials and lack of responsibility by Boeing,  the aircraft manufacturer with pedigree finally admitted its shortcomings of its newest passenger jet.  The company should have known better. They rushed to launch the 737 Max due to competitive pressures. Armchair public people think it was a software problem. It was beyond that. It is a structural problem that affects flight dynamics. Both the center of gravity and the mass moment of inertia (in engineering lingo) are too far forward. This causes the nose to dive. The MCAS is just a make-shift for the problem. A single reliable measurement and display of Angle of Attack (AOA) sensor rather than typically two was an additional negligence on the part of the design. Last but not least, the lack of training and written Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) instructions, along with an unproven useless hazardous algorithm, compounded the risks.

This pragmatic author’s take on this one is; Boycott this jet indefinitely. First and foremost for your safety and second, to make a bold statement that the way the whole matter was handled is despicable for the brand whose paramount responsibility is passenger and crew safety.

Unfortunately, many organizations fall victim to ineptness that Boeing did.

  • Why do you think a company which hires and contracts missionaries changed its name from Blackwater to XE, and then Academi? According to source Wikipedia, “Academi is an American private military company founded in 1997 by former Navy SEAL officer Erik Prince as Blackwater, renamed as Xe Services in 2009 and now known as Academi since 2011 after the company was acquired by a group of private investors. The company received widespread notoriety in 2007, when a group of its employees were convicted of killing 14 Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square, Baghdad for which four guards were convicted in a U.S. court.” Quite the business to aspire to operating. Imagine the amount of exposure to liabilities. How well does Erik Prince, its founder and strategist sleep at night? Not caring a whit as long as he is increasing his wealth, that’s what matters to a sociopath.
  • Monsanto, the company everyone loves to hate (except for its enablers). For some decades, the crop chemical company produced and profited from the chemicals that caused destruction, wiping out millions of species by spreading poisonous agrichemicals, destroying our fragile ecosystems, poisoning our soils and entire web of life, undermining every aspect of our lives for financial profit. It also made users vulnerable to the lethal cancerous ingredients. Monsanto is better known as the company which introduced the GMO on your plate, as well as for the popular weed killer herbicide The Monsanto Bayer merger is a great brand strategy for Monsanto. Destructive conglomerates marry each other. However, “Bayer [does] significantly better public-relations work than Monsanto, but that’s it,” contends Antonius Michelmann, CEO of the Coalition against BAYER-Dangers. “Both, Monsanto and Bayer are poisoning and immediately endangering animals, plants and human life. Both care just about profits and nothing else.” Much said!
  • Johnson & Johnson (J&J), the drug giant, known for its baby products, was accused of deceptive marketing conspiracy, by the State of Oklahoma, to drive up sales of its powerful opioid Duragesic painkillers. The state is claiming that J&J worked to aggressively promote opioids to people who did not need the drugs so as to compete with Purdue Pharma. J&J deliberately ignored warnings about addiction and death.

According to Anti-Media, a non-partisan, anti-establishment news publisher and crowd-curated media aggregator, compiled a list with the 10 worst food companies, with genetically modified faux food. The top five (quoted from the source) are:

#1 ConAgra: Their family of brands include Hunt’s, Marie Callender’s, Orville Redenbacher and many others. The compony was found guilty of “health code violations and bacterial contaminations at its food processing facilities, which have endangered consumers and in some cases been linked to deaths.” They’ve also concealed the use of GMOs in their products and practice unethical factory-farm sourcing.

#2 General Mills: Trisodium Phosphate (also known as TSP) is an additive and flavor enhancer found in thousands of frozen and processed foods, including kids’ cereals. It also happens to be an ingredient that was used in industrial cleaners

#3 Kraft Foods: Their Mac N’ Cheese has a golden looking tone to it thanks to  the artificial coloring agent Yellow No. 6 which it uses. However, it has been linked to hyperactivity, asthma, skin conditions and unsurprisingly even cancer. In 2013, following intense pressure, the toxic food company finally removed the artificial coloring. Kraft also hides the presence of GMOs in their foods

#4 Heinz: It merged with Kraft Foods in 2013 (bought by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway and the private equity firm 3G Capital). Both brands instantly became partners in food crime for the sake of cost cutting and higher profits yet at the health detriment of their customers at the kitchen table. What Brazilian 3G Capital has purchased (past and present), it turned into disasters with its aggressive at-any-cost cutting. Speaks volumes of the people pulling the reins at the very top. It doesn’t take a psychotropic individual or anyone with an MBA to simply cost cut to increase profit. Anyone can do that. However, it take a contriver with humility and with a long-term view to increase sales and profit more cleverly.

#5 Campbell’s Soup Company: The brand has been sued for hiding the presence of GMOs and for labeling foods as low-sodium when they contain as much salt as regular products. The average cup of Campbell’s soup contains a staggering 850mg of sodium. Unless that’s your only major meal of the day, consuming it means you’re risking heart attacks, diabetes and high blood pressure. Just as importantly, if not more so, is the fact that for many decades, Campbell’s has lined its epoxy-resin cans with the toxic chemical, bisphenol A (BPA). “BPA has been linked in lab studies to breast and prostate cancer, infertility, early puberty in girls, type-2 diabetes, obesity, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,” according to Breastcancerfund.org. Only recently did the company finally bow to pressure and phase BPA out of its production.

Other repulsive processed food and beverage culprits on the list (in chronological order), which shouldn’t be raising any eyebrows, include Coca Cola, Nestlé, Kellogg’s, PepsiCo and Hershey’s.

The only method the above brands are responding to their sliding market share, revenues and much more is by utilizing their available cash to purchase health food and functional beverage young companies. These ships are too big to change course despite their plethora of resources.

Seems it is a prerequisite for success that an established food company ought to actively lie to their customers to retain and perhaps grow their business. That worked in the short term.

Here is something off the beaten path compared to the above businesses but with a huge eye sore in terms of their business practices. True story. An American tourist from NY, during his stay on a popular seaside oyster bar on the Greek island of Mykonos in May 2019, paid 836 Euros (about 938 USD) for Calamari (fried squid), a bottled waters, and a couple of beers. Following this outcome, the tourist trap had a slew of complaints and dreadful reviews on Tripadvisor.
Read at this link: https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowUserReviews-g659660-d129913…

However, the unmoved owner justified his reasons with audacity. The business will surely not remain open for much longer, thanks to short-sightedness. At this day and age…most notably due to the powerful influence of social media, this business practice will not survive for too long.

How to focus on conscious leadership

Typically, private and family remodeling business in various industries put their name on and behind the business. With privately held companies, they are in no pressure to dumb down the products to calm down investor impatience. Instead, companies such as British company Dyson with its dynamic team of engineers do what companies, private or public, should always be doing: innovating with practical new products and refining existing ones.

It is very common in popular culture to see business owners as greedy, selfish, revenues and profit at any cost with no regard for employees or customers. However, this usually applies to public companies who simply bow to their shareholder expectations. A business should be viewed as a sacred obligation to employees, customers, suppliers and everyone who is directly or indirectly impacted the business and its executives. The internal culture is one which ensures the customers are given superb value and great customer service, and by going to great lengths to ensure employees are well taken care of. In addition, treating all vendors, suppliers, service companies, etc. with respect. While our business directly impacts the lives of several hundred people it indirectly impacts the livelihood of several thousand. Therefore, it is critical that  high standards are maintained as the cost of negligence or failure is too high. Money can be earned doing things with conscience…it may take longer but the impact will remain positive and sustainable.

Sadly, the fabric of today’s corporate world is dominated by considerations on shareholder returns at the detriment to innovation, goodwill, reputation, customer service and quality products. The conscious captains of industries are the heroes. Few and far between.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

____________________________________________________

Request your TWO FREE chapters of this popular book with no obligation.

EntrepreneurialEssentials - FrontCover Final

1 Comment

Filed under 1, Business, business management, Business success, business vitality, company image and reputation, decision making management, executive decision making, inept management, management

How to Blemish Your Brand and Lose Market Share Due to Short-foresightedness: The Trouble with Major Food Brands

By James D. Roumeliotis

Nestle

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Yours truly, who took the audacious dive into the functional food and beverage business as a start-up and has presently taken it into the early stage phase, is having a field day reading about the challenges and frequent plethora of lawsuits brought about by consumers who have had enough of the deceit of the major food and beverage brands.

Once upon a time, during previous generations, renowned household brands such as Kraft, Kellogg’s, Pepsi Co. and General Mills, among many others, who once dominated the supermarket shelves along with loyalty.  Today, through their complacency and/or (as public companies) continuous pressure for quarterly sales and profit results mount, as well as through their cunning practices, we notice a backlash from food shoppers – most notably the more health conscious and finicky Millennials.

What Gives in the New Normal?

Today, consumers are more health conscious. This justifies the constant and extensive growth and popularity of the organic, non-GMO, clean label, plant based, farm-to-table and gluten-free product offerings. A large percentage of food producers of products in those categories are the small and nimble new kids on the block. They have hit hard on the established brands who are scrambling to adjust to this new reality.

Despite their vast resources and capital at their disposal, as large ships, they are not able to swiftly make the necessary reformulations or to introduce a healthier fare. As a result, the pressure from the unceasing decline of their revenues and market share are leaving them with no choice but to react, rather than be proactive.  Their path to least resistance is to acquire small health food and functional beverage brands in large numbers to compensate for their short-foresightedness.

The Permanent Health Craze

Hasty and reactive decisions, conniving strategy and foolish leadership have come back to bite them – serves them right. Use of inexpensive and toxic ingredients to engineer taste profiles and in some cases, make the products addictive, some of which include refined grains, MSG, artificial colors and flavors, high fructose corn syrup, Carrageenan and the other artificial and unfavorable which most of us have a difficult time pronouncing. Add to this GMO corn, soy and…well you get it.  More expensive and healthier options can be used but their fiscal paranoia signifies to them this will hurt their bottom line. The big brands avoid raising prices to compensate for more expensive natural ingredients despite research showing that consumers are willing to pay more for healthier choices.

Lawsuits Galore

The cause of distrust among consumers can be rationalized due to corporations misleading the public as a whole, since most of those public food producers are, first and foremost, accountable to heir shareholders. Deliberate misleading information by food producers in regard to nutritional benefits is akin to the nickel-and-diming by airlines, hotels and banks. But unlike the latter list, when it pertains to food, it is considered more critical as our health is at stake.

As a result, in the last few years, there have been frequent class action lawsuits against food and beverage companies. Everything from Non-GMO claims and the use of a better-for-you sounding ingredient such as “evaporated cane juice” rather than using the simple term “sugar” (one and the same). Such negligence and deceptive practices have made the established food brands vulnerable.

According to a Forbes August 2017 article by John O’Brien, titled “Food Companies Beware: Class Action Attorneys Aren’t Slowing Down”, it describes that  “Plaintiffs attorneys who target food and beverage companies with class action lawsuits are showing no signs of slowing down, according to analysis from international law firm Perkins Coie that also shows California’s lawyers are the most active.” Some of those lawsuits include consumers claiming they were misled into buying the product due to mislabeling.

Here is a small sample list of the shameful established food and beverage brands (click for the link to lawsuit article) with seemingly dysfunctional and old school strategies. They have become a favorite punch bag from the likes of this author along with numerous consumer groups and their hired attorneys.

Why Brand Image and Loyalty Matter

A “Brand” is a promise of something that will be delivered by a business. This promise comes in a form of quality, an experience and a certain expectation in the mind of the consumer. It includes the Unique Selling Proposition (USP). Marketing, on the other hand, is about spreading compelling messages to your target audience while branding is a combination of words and action. Marketing is extroverted and communicates quickly, while branding is introverted and a slow process if it’s to produce any real impact. Effective marketing activities are vital in developing a brand. When combined successfully, branding and marketing create and promote value, trust, loyalty and confidence in a company’s image, products and services.

According to an Edelman’s Trust Barometer, it was revealed that 77% of respondents refused to buy products from companies they distrusted. More disturbing is that 72% said they had criticized a distrusted company to a friend or colleague.

When customers are treated with honesty and delighted by a particular brand experience, they begin to bond emotionally with the brand. They become brand loyalists and advocates – buying the brand more often and recommending it to others. This behavior serves to build the brand’s reputation. This approach is priceless –even though it may take longer to take positive effect.

Brand reputation quote from Benjamin Franklin

Customers first, employees second — investors/shareholders third

In the ivory towers of public corporations, the CEO and board of directors have been programmed to put their stakeholders best interests above all else. Their mission is to do what it reasonably takes to deliver quarterly results ─ in other words, to focus on the short term rather than sow the seeds and do what is most beneficial for the future direction of the company ─ despite any short-term pains. Savvy and considerate top management know better that customers and employees are the two key drivers of corporate success.  The main principle is that if employees have a positive attitude, are passionate, well trained and competent, results will be reflected through positive customer experiences resulting in brand loyalty. Ultimately, the shareholders will reap the benefits through stock performance and generous dividend distributions.

Large well-established companies have several advantages over smaller ones mainly due to their imposing size, their brand recognition as well as for their plethora of cash and human capital. However, despite their deep pockets and plethora of resources, they are risk adverse, bureaucratic in their decision-making process and to some extent, disengaged from their customers. Moreover, if they are a public company, their initial allegiance is to their shareholders.

Start-ups and smaller businesses, on the other hand, have less money and resources at their disposal to grow or even compete in the unapologetic and competitive landscape. Yet, the small business is agile, nimble and creative and possess several advantages such as a clean slate, rather than the baggage many large corporations have been carrying over the years, as well as perceived as more trusting by consumers, further engaged with their customers, and a refreshing alternative to the established brands – provided the products offer unique and attractive characteristics.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

___________________________________________________

Request your TWO FREE chapters of this popular book with no obligation.

Leave a comment

Filed under 1, brand equity, Branding, branding not products, Business, business management, consumer packaged goods marketing, cpg branding, customer engagement, customer experience, decision making management, discerning clients, discriminating clients, dysfunctional companies, executive decision making, Food business, Food entrepreneurship, food marketing, Food production business, inept management, leadership, poor leadership, preventing business problems, public relations