Hello There, Guest!

  •  Previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • ...
  • 9
  • Next 
  •  
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The problem with critics
#21
stickshark Wrote:have a valid point that tool profits are unethical because some LOA denied any profit.


I'd suggest the unethicality is primarily in the denial, not the profit. I assumed there was tool profit, and when encountering the controversy on the 'net, asked upline and had it confirmed. On the other hand, even within my LOA I've heard of people being told N21 is non-profit. Someone said as much on TTAA comments. They are wrong, but clearly they heard it somewhere - the question is where? It's not originating from N21 or N21 top leadership - A talk called "Straight Talk" by Jim Dornan explictly says it's a for profit company.

It seems to me in this case there's no unethicality at all involved, just somebody is wrong in their beliefs and unfortunately promulgating that misguided belief to others. One wonders how much of that has occurred in other LOAs? Where "no tool profit" has merely been misguided myth?

To your earlier post though - "the problem is that by the time we get them [students] to a stage where they should be thinking for themselves we have so indoctrinated them that they can no longer challenge the theories."

I think you've expounded on a very important point, and it's very much a self-reinforcing situation. By definition, a qualifying Diamond (or even Platinum for that matter) has done something that they know works. One therefore has to ask - why do anything differently, if it worked? Wouldn't they almost be derelict if they advised IBOs to do something different to what they did to succeed?

As such, only "successful" IBOs are really in a position to innovate, but their incentive to innovate is almost non-existent. The forces of "culture" also play a part. In the medical profession in much of the west there are huge problems with the ridiculous, and dangerous, working hours imposed on interns. They are operating exorbitant hours without enough rest, and not surprisingly many medical errors result. It's damn tough. But there's a "culture" that the senior doctors had to go through hell to get their residency - why should interns of today get it easier?

So there are both cultural and logical disincentives to innovate in Amway. What's perhaps worse, due to the very nature of networking, innovating means you're at an immediate disadvantage as you can no longer as effectively "use" your upline or other existing resources (eg BSM) as they may contradict what you're trying to do.

But it can be done. Whether we disagree or not with the actual techniques of Woodward and Brady, they innovated ("Team" approach) and succeeded in promulgating that innovation. I suspect Wolgamott and Kosage may be hoping to do the same, Kosage in particular with his "social networking" focus.
 Reply
#22
The reason I threw Theodore Roosevelt into the mix at this stage was that I was listening to a refreshing business program on Irish radio this morning - they had a sports coach who also does some business talks - and with all the doom, gloom & critics around at the moment it was great to hear someone talking about - getting on with the future, flushing the past, ignoring the critics, setting goals and daring to dream dreams of success, also taking about having parents who encouraged him to try whatever he wanted to try and not to fear failure and a lot lot more. He came from a small town/village in Ireland.
So yes I'm sure some people who are critics of whatever have some valid points [in fact I was critical of the system here in UK/ROI because IMO it stifled the
growth of the Amway business] but evangelical critics of a given topic are equally as bad as fanatical supporters of a topic -
I believe we do not have the time to dwell and stay stuck in the mire - if we spent to long analysing what went wrong we will spend less time in putting it right - we are all aware of previous and ongoing challenges within both Amway & the 'systems' but as the guy on radio said this morning we must take personal positive action and responsibility to ensure we succeed in our chosen field -
So when I build my Amway business I build it with ethics and responsibility - and believe me I have a lot of critics even in my own family.
'The only way I can succeed in business is to proactively do something for 'MY BUSINESS' every day'
I look to the Future - for the Future is where I'm going to spend the rest of my Life
 Reply
#23
RW1 Wrote:“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”
Theodore Roosevelt


I can recognize and navigate "problems" in Amway; correct as necessary and continue on to personal and organizational success.

Critics may have a "role" as Stickshark comments, but at the end of the day, they can only offer the perspective and opinion of someone who couldn't or wouldn't operate despite the challenges they "discovered," even where their knowledge, insight, and efforts could have reshaped the landscape as an active participant rather than influencing it from the outside as ultimately just a "concerned victim" or concerned bystander (with even less credibility...)

Coincidentally, changing things "from the inside" would have likely required the same level of commitment, sacrifice, persistence, and focus that would have led to success in any case, leaving me with the sense it's not the "problems" critics identify that are at the root of their discontent, but that the effort associated with being a critic is more palatable than the effort associated with being an agent of change, and a measurable success, in the very environment they criticize.

So, I don't know what is "the problem with critics," but I do see the problem, for me, of being one...
 Reply
#24
Bridgett Wrote:
Deb Wrote:And if you're an IBO who's reading this and realizes your upline is still telling you stuff like that: you need to find a better upline.


Well...it's not exactly that easy. As we all know, preserving the Line of Sponsorship is something that Amway, and Rich DeVos in particular, is very very VERY committed to.

One can't simply "find a better upline."

.


I should have expanded on this a bit - my attitude is that there ARE pockets of "Accreditation Resistance" out there still. If an IBO is being told "we don't make any money on tools and functions" - they're probably getting those things stuffed down their throats, making a concept like "profitability" kind of scarce. If the IBO doesn't follow along faithfully - they get "shunned".

Yes, Rich wants to preserve the LOS as much as possible - BUT: if an IBO calls Amway and says "my upline forces me to buy tapes" or "my upline refuses to help me" - the Corp WILL help relocate that IBO when all else fails - or at least have them set up to be "serviced" by another LOS. We (the Bass Co) "adopted" a few IBOs this way.

For those not aware:
"Servicing" (in a Standard Fullfillment group) means that a Platinum-and-above takes care of an IBO as if that person is in their personal group - and at the end of the month, the volume from that IBO is transferred to the IBO's sponsor. The sponsor pays a small fee back to the "handler" - in our case, 10% of the BV transferred. It's a good arrangement that keeps the PV in the LOS but separates people who simply don't work well together, for whatever reason.
 Reply
#25
I guess my point is that the distribution of product, particularly now then stuff can be shipped right to the IBO in the U.S., is not that terribly important of a role for an upline.
In the Chicago area, even with my Sponsor living only 15 miles away, having to go to her place became more of a negative than a positive because of the insane traffic. Same for those who came to my home. The time it took was very inefficient. So taking away that particular task allowed all of us to put our efforts towards other things. Including getting together and having fun, rather than trying to make "product pickup" fun.

So, IMO, what I think is of value in having an Upline and a larger organization of crossline, isn't necessarily HOW to build this business (I mean really. Why be so engineer about it? Use some product, sell some product, expose the business to others, duplicate. This is not rocket science, people.) it's the encouragement and it's the environment that is created.
 Reply
#26
Regarding critics...

There is a difference between being a critic and being critical. It all goes back to one's motivation and one's intention.

Who I would call the Amway/AMO Critics are the ones who give a rat's a$$ about the future of Amway. They would like to see the whole Corporation come tumbling down and every single ABO/IBO with it. As I've said, they are a flea on a dog's butt as far as I'm concerned, because they are mean-spirited, play dirty, can't be trusted, and can find nothing good/postive to say about Amway, LOAs, and IBOs/ABOs.

Who I would call those critical of Amway and/or LOAs are the one's who do care about the future of Amway. They would like to see the Corporation and all ABOs/IBOs reach their potential. These people offer criticism as a way to improve the situation. And they do it in a way that doesn't burn bridges. They do it in a way where "the powers that be" can actually hear/receive the criticism, and even have the Powers That Be thank them for such feedback.
 Reply
#27
IBOFB - totally agree with your last post. And yes it is the denial not the profit that is unethical.

RW1 - "evangelical critics of a given topic are equally as bad as fanatical supporters of a topic". Yes I agree both the supports and the detractors once they get evangelical and/or myopic they loose credibility and become irrational. I think Tex is a classic example of this myopic vision.

These goes for Bridgett's comments as well. Yes the critics who whole intention (conscious or sub conscious) is to destroy all things associated with Amway, are like flea that need removal. However a wise leader would consider the root cause of their criticism and make sure that these things don't happen in there LOA, or were fixed and/or overcome. Yes it is rare to find a critic who actually wants the Amway thing to succeed, however on the flip side it is rare to find a IBO who is open to the fact that this business isn't perfect/has some issues.

Life really would be much simpler if we were honest with ourselves and our intentions/beliefs. However human nature seems to be determined to hide our true motives even from ourselves.
 Reply
#28
I've been a part of the Yager LOA since late 2001. I've never encountered any denial of tool profits. I pointed that out, not to downplay any issues others have had regarding transparency, but to show the problem isn't ubiquitous within the large, old LOAs. Speakers have been transparent about it from stage, and on audio recordings. I always compared it to the huge "self-help" industry. I was a Nightingale-Conant customer before I discovered the Amway/Quixtar business. I expected there was profit in the tools provided by my LOA, so I never went looking for statements that claimed it was a non-profit service.

One thing I'm not sure about is how much money Scott and MJ Michael made off of my tool purchases. I expect very little, because when I made a purchase from the Michael's inventory, they wrote "Held" on the receipt. This indicated that Don and Jan Held (my true up-line) were getting a piece of the profit in the tool I purchased. I have never met or worked with the Held's. I've always plugged in to the Michael's functions. This is probably too much information. I figured it might be worth pointing out that they were diligent in keeping tool profits true to Amway lines of sponsorship. Maybe it's irrelevant. It's irrelevant to me anyways. I'm grateful that the Michael's provide a great system and actively provide support for people like me who can't add anything to their income, either from tools or PV/BV.
 Reply
#29
stickshark wrote:
Quote:however on the flip side it is rare to find a IBO who is open to the fact that this business isn't perfect/has some issues.

I think you are generalising to much here - those of us who run our Amway business as a business know it's not perfect. Just like any business we are subject to the weakness and strengths of the human being. Certainly here in the UK/ROI we know we do have a perfect business - I engage regularly with other direct selling / mlm colleagues as well as traditional business colleagues and on points of disagreement we often agree to disagree because of our different models. I believe the best option for me is to leave this where it is and turn my thoughts towards positive business building - this will go around in circles and I'd rather keep going straight. :grin:
'The only way I can succeed in business is to proactively do something for 'MY BUSINESS' every day'
I look to the Future - for the Future is where I'm going to spend the rest of my Life
 Reply
#30
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/2008/05/11/how-one-reader-narrowly-avoided-multilevel-marketing/#comment-131931">http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/2008/ ... ent-131931</a><!-- m -->

This blog is from a nice financial blog, I follow some of it's articles sometimes.

I run into this one. On the one hand, it highlights some of the "cliches" and bad things I think we really should move beyond:
- contacting by saying you're looking for someone JUST LIKE THEM, or
- talking about cars in the plan instead of focusing on real life tangible things you can do with $500, let alone $5,000 per month), or
- making it sound like tools are mandatory on startup i.e. startup cost as $150-200.
- making it look like it' sjust a matter of signing up to go diamond.

However, this is one of the objections that really make me pull my hair out because I think its something that's rooted in peoples consciousness, he says:

Quote:Your readers should be aware of these operations! They may sound good, and the money may be real, but it’s all top-heavy. The ones at the bottom (ie. YOU) won’t be making all that money, but you’ll help someone else do it!

No no no!!! There's hundreds of emeralds whose uplines are not Emeralds, and many diamonds whose uplines are not diamonds. And it's not just at that level. A 4000 PV with 3000 from one leg and 1000 from another makes less money than a 2500 PV giving out five PV checks of 600PV level.

This is one of the most misunderstood aspects of the business.
 Reply
  •  Previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • ...
  • 9
  • Next 
  •  

 
Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)