It has been interesting watching the world react to a major corporation's marketing decisions. A major beverage company created offense with its consumers this year, and its customers reacted with social media, boycott (temporary), and perhaps changed consumption habits (permanent). Everyone is fairly familiar with the controversy. One might have ignored it in the early weeks, but its longevity and news exposure renders that impossible.
There have been repercussions at the employer. The Vice President of Marketing for this brand and the Global Vice President of Marketing have been "put on administrative leave." The 39-year-old brand VP has a reported net worth around $13 million, and an annual income around $1.5 million. The CEO of the company has a net worth reported of $35 million and an annual income of $12 million.
The CEO was recently in the news asking that consumers "blame him for the fateful . . . promotion." He says that the "buck stopped with him when it came to the disastrous promotion." And, he asks that consumers "not punish the 65,000 people whose livelihoods depend on" the supply, manufacture, distribution of the company's product.
That phrase has a history. Harry S. Truman is said to have kept a sign on his desk proclaiming this responsibility.
The plea is interesting in its human element. There are a great many people who make a living through the manufacture and distribution of products. We all purchase a spectrum of products each month, influenced by a variety of factors. Some are driven by price alone. Others drawn by past experiences.
A few weak-minded folks actually buy because they really think some celebrity actually consumes that product. As much as one might strive to doubt that such purchase decisions are based on celebrity endorsement or advertisement, the simple fact is that if those campaigns did not work companies would not invest in them.
The celebrity at the heart of this story has a reported net worth of $1.5 million. The deal this beverage company made reportedly paid this celebrity $150,000. Someone believed that this campaign would increase sales, generate production, and thus produce profit. The purpose of business is to produce profit.
Remember when the CEO of Ford came out and apologized for the Edsel but made that impassioned plea to "think about the workers?" Remember when the CEO of Mars candy came out and apologized for turning down the chance to be featured in one of history's biggest films, and asked us to all "think of the candymakers?" Remember when the CEO of Decca records passed on the "no good" sound of the Beatles, and then plead for consumers to buy its other records instead and "think of the performers?"
None of those pleas really happened. But those business decisions did. Western Union turned down the chance to buy the telephone. Blockbuster passed on buying Netflix, and Yahoo passed on Google. The world of business is full of stories of failure.
And of success. There have been many brilliant decisions made over the years, and likely some lucky ones. When a company makes the right decision, profits flow and workers benefit. When there is a blunder, the worker suffers. Sometimes the decision makers suffer, but the fact is the impact may be more muted on the person with an 11-digit net worth.
If the buck stopped there, perhaps some of those bucks would flow back to the working people for whom there is so much concern. No?
While Anheuser-Busch has sought to minimize the role Mulvaney played in its strategy, Whitworth reaffirmed the company would not change its stance towards its partnerships.
The same is true in the world of work safety. It is not uncommon for the employer to voice concern when someone is hurt at work. There is usually regret about the outcome. In my years of practice, I also frequently heard regret about planning, management, and execution. Many fine managers lamented to me how they never saw an accident coming, never thought to move this, guard that, or otherwise proact. Following an injury, they were often contrite, and corrective measures were often readily undertaken.
But a few, a small few, really took it personally. For them, the buck really did stop with them. I knew them to visit hospitals, worker homes, and more. They took the injury to an employee personally. The impact of the injury affected them personally. There were groceries purchased, gifts conveyed to children, and heartfelt time spent with the worker. There was genuine and sincere concern for the person that had been injured and the people that surrounded him/her.
If you are ever there, an injury comes to you, I hope you have that kind of leader. I hope for you that the buck stopping really means action and assistance. It is fine to hear "I'm sorry," but actions speak louder than words. An injured worker once told me at a mediation in which an accommodation was offered: "you're not doing me any favors here." But favors are not the point. Words are not the point. Action.
In the world of sales, there may be repercussions from decisions. The worker delivering brand A last week can find work delivering brand B this week, as consumer demand shifts. As I grab an Orbitz and a Kudo and jump in my Pontiac to head for the airport for my PanAm flight this afternoon, I will listen to my Zune and swing by the Fotomat and be grateful that all these accoutrement remain available to me because their CEOs made successful pleas to the consumer to just consider those company's workers.
That is fanciful. It is doubtful that a company this successful will be laid to history based on one unpopular decision, even if it is compounded by the recovery. But, this all reminds that decisions have consequences, some better and others not. There will be repercussions, some good and others not. Workers will be impacted, empires launched and lost.
Those with whom responsibility rests will make their own decisions. they will be there for that injured worker or not. They will make the recovery, restoration, and reemployment of that worker paramount or they will not. They will speak eloquent words and make impassioned points, or they will not. They will engage and act, or they will not. It is a complex world in which we live and work. It will remain so.
What does the buck stopping really mean?
