Defaulting to Lies

I'm not upset that you lied to me,
I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.

― Friedrich Nietzsche

Why do some salespeople default to lies, no matter the stakes? When there are no stakes? When nobody's erred. When all that's requested is a straightforward reply.

Do they need that much to be loved?

I think so. I think, as well, they believe everyone else just fell off a turnip truck.

If your default mode is to lie, ask yourself: 

• Am I playing to the stereotype of the salesperson as huckster?
• Do my customers tell other customers I'm an inveterate liar? 
• Is my default mode―lying―the reason my income is meager?

No Thanks

Why does a publication subscriber quit? Why does an association member?

Lapse research always shows she quits for one or more of these five reasons:

• Your product is irrelevant
• Your price is too high
• She's too busy to take advantage of your product
• She gets what she needs on line
• She had trouble renewing

Drunk on their own "look at all we offer" Kool-Aid, however, marketers forget a customer subscribes or joins for a specific reason―and quits for a specific reason. She does the former to fill a need; and the latter when that need is filled; is no longer filled; went unfulfilled; or no longer matters.

It's convenient to marketers just to shove a quitter into some segment like "medical device sales rep"―as if that had a whit to do with the reason she became a customer―and conclude, "Well, some medical device sales reps are quitters."

But that facile conclusion sheds little light on the difference between the quitter and the loyal customer, and none on the specific reason the quitter quit. To do that, you need to contact her on the phone and have a "frank and open" discussion with the goal of listening.

When you do, you'll discover, indeed, she quit for one of the above five reasons; but you'll also unearth a lot more―real-world intelligence you can use to improve your product:

• How―specifically―did your product become irrelevant?
• Why is your price objectionable?
• Why can't she "make time" for you in her day?
• What unique value do competitors provide her?
• Why is renewal a source of friction?

You'd be amazed at what in-depth lapse research will tell you.

One large national association I assisted discovered, in fact, it wasn't bleeding thousands of members every year, as it believed. Members were mailing their renewal payments to the local chapters, because no reply envelope was included with the renewal invoice. The chapters were banking the dues income―without reporting its source.

Tubs of Fun

Vicente Gonzalez, a congressman from Texas, told CNN this week Sam Hyde killed 26 churchgoers in his state.

Sam Hyde is not a mass murderer, but a comedian and meme, as The New York Times reports.

Gonzalez was recycling fake news a producer had shared, while the congressman had been waiting for a TV interview earlier the same day.

Fake news isn't new.

H.L. Mencken spread some in his own day, reporting in The New York Evening Mail on December 28, 1917, that President Millard Fillmore was responsible for introducing the bathtub to America.

"Bathtubs are so common today that it is almost impossible to imagine a world without them," Mencken wrote. "They are familiar to nearly everyone in all incorporated towns; in most of the large cities it is unlawful to build a dwelling house without putting them in; even on the farm they have begun to come into use."

But no one remembers who popularized the bathtub, Mencken wrote. Turns out, "it was the example of President Millard Fillmore that, even more than the grudging medical approval, gave the bathtub recognition and respectability in the United States." 

Fillmore was "an ardent advocate of the new invention, and on succeeding to the Presidency at Taylor's death, July 9, 1850, he instructed his secretary of war, General Charles M. Conrad, to invite tenders for the construction of a bathtub in the White House."

Within days of Mencken's New York Evening Mail article, Fillmore's introduction of the bathtub solidified into fact: it was cited in trade and professional journals; on the floor of Congress; and in Mencken's own newspaper. And it's still cited today, although Mencken's article was a gag.

"It never occurred to me it would be taken seriously,” he said.

Looks Like Gordon Gekko was Right

It’s not a principle until it costs you money.

― Bill Bernbach

Corporate Social Responsibility damps stock price, says a new study by two Florida Atlantic University business professors.

A company that champions the environment, human rights, diversity, product safety, or other causes shoulders costs which depress its Wall Street performance, according to the study, because a CSR initiative diverts resources from growing the core business.

Looks like Gordon Gekko was right.

While Fortune 500 companies spend over $15 billion a year on philanthropic and CSR activities, most of the money may be no more than a disguised PR spend.

A study published last year shows a CSR initiative will succeed or fail in direct proportion to the CEO's greed, as measured by his ownership of luxury assets like fancy cars, boats, and second homes.

The study found that companies led by greedy CEOs have low-scoring CSR initiatives, while those led by generous CEOs have high-scoring initiatives. It also found that greedy CEOs undertake CSR initiatives primarily to increase their own power and pay.

The findings reinforce those of psychology studies showing that people who worship possessions and pursue their acquisition are less sensitive to their effects on others; less willing to share their money and possessions with charities, friends, or family members; and less likely to engage in environmentally responsible behaviors.

Now?