I have always maintained that if you want to know what someone believes, look at what they do and not what they say. I begin with this personal reflection because in the world of marketing it is a fertile ground for many who say one thing, and their companies do the opposite. To think that efficient marketing is the one that makes up (uses this term as a synonym for deception) our shame, is to take the part for the whole, the kjordan telephone number that works is the one that highlights our strengths and shows who we are, even sometimes exposing things that could be improved and the effort to overcome those limitations.At this time, consumer associations, receiving and regulatory bodies, in principle of complaints and lack of customer information, as well as valid intermediaries, have taken a lot of boom (and I think with a lot of sense due to the evolution of the clientele). first line between companies, administrations and clients. To these associations to fulfill their mission, we only have to ask them for impartiality, objectivity and to generate knowledge applicable to the improvement of business actions, and legislative improvements, as well as to educate and train clients in their rights and obligations. All functions of great value for the markets and for all the members of these markets, don’t you think? It seems clear that due to the role that these associations or entities concerned with defending the rights of clients should take, it seems unthinkable that their work should not be taken with the seriousness that we should. Associations of this type appear spontaneously, created by certain groups, by groups of partners, etc., all the possible ways seem interesting to me for creating this type of guardian of the rights of the clients.
However, I do miss, and I think it would be a way of acting to convey what many companies believe in, that they were the ones that created, promoted and adhered to the conclusions that these customer associations determined, which were ultimately term as a mediating institution that arbitrates the differences between clients and companies. Wouldn’t it make sense, if companies really believe that their customers and their satisfaction come first for brands, that they promote independent organizations that regulate the satisfaction of these customers? And also, that these associations were given enough weight, authority and social relevance for their work to make sense and justify it? For it, In addition to creating them, they should be endowed with a greater content than they currently do not have and, above all, they should be allowed to work independently, even if their employers or funders are the companies themselves, their clients and the public administrations. With this I understand that when all the groups represented meet, objectivity and independence arise in their work. I know that you are thinking that nobody is going to throw stones on their own roof, and I agree with you, but I also defend that when there are dissatisfied clients who make complaints and have a bad image of a certain performance, the stone that is thrown is over all rooftops, harming everyone, and that is where those organizations that perform best can excel, gain competitive advantages,
I do not think that when these organizations, those that are really serious and independent and that their work is carried out to safeguard the rights and satisfaction of the client, they identify themselves as the enemy, there is always the feeling that companies do not want to have objective external control , when in fact the greatest control of the company that pretends to be competitive must be internal, the one imposed by the organization itself, obviously if we are talking about companies that claim to be benchmarks in the markets, and I include so that there are no doubts, it is not a As a matter of fact, this objective can only be achieved by organizations of a certain size, anyone can aspire to be a benchmark in the market with their resources and above all with their actions.To think that these associations are the enemy, is to reject an opportunity by companies to achieve a commercial impact even more valued by customers than the products we market themselves, to show a business behavior of real commitment to the satisfaction of those customers. The public administrations, in the same way, have to bet that the emergence and work of these receivers of complaints generate knowledge and justice for the clients, that their work allows them to improve their trust, which after all are maintained by the economy , are the ones who vote. I do not think that in this sense, to label some client associations as being politicized and to use this as a throwing weapon trying to reduce the quality of the services they provide, simply because what they emit, they say, They conclude, it is not to the liking of some, it is not doing the job for which they are chosen adequately and much less is it a position that is for the benefit of all, but of a few. It is the public administrations that should, together with the truly committed companies, be on the customer’s side, with the satisfaction of this and that sometimes leads to uncomfortable situations, but there is no other way to improve a commercial reality.
Everything that is controlling first-hand how we do things and using this to improve, will be welcome, now we must know who is at the forefront of these initiatives to really show who the leaders in marketing are, who want the best for their customers.