I’ll be doing another riff fully explaining this concept later, so just briefly, this declaration (the title of this post) stems from my observation that companies (and people) tend to say one thing, but mean something completely different. Understanding this requires a shift in your perspective. Iinstead of thinking about a company as a group of individuals working collectively, to seeing it as an entity whose first rule of business is to ensure it’s survival. Typically, this responsibility is left to the Board of Directors (if it’s a public company) and the executive management team. Let’s call this group the “leaders” of a company.

So, let’s get his started. How many of you have heard a company say that their customers are their most important asset (or something to that effect). Now let’s think about this very briefly. If you’re charged with the survival of a company, what is your number one concern? Well what I always heard is the bottom line. That is to say, how much profit is the company generating. So I ask you, can a company both believe that customers are the most important aspect of their company while simultaneously trying to maximize profits?

In my opinion, I believe that the answer to that question is no. Now of course, let me include a disclaimer that not EVERY company is like this. There are a few companies that actually do a very good job of supporting the ideal that their customers are what’s most important. However, unfortunately, I believe there are only a few companies that can come close to this ideal.

Let me use a common technology to illustrate how what a company says means something different to the leaders of a company. Have you ever gotten a voice or automated response system when you called a company for something? Now what most companies will say is, this is for the “benefit” of their clients. I think that, if you’re like me, you hate interacting with these systems.

The truth behind these systems is that they are a replacement for someone actually answering your call and figuring out what to do with the call, where to route it, or putting you into a queue. This task used to be done by humans and was typically called “first line support.” First line support is a fancy way or saying that your call is being assessed to determine “how important is the call” and “who should deal with the call.” So the bottom line is that these systems save a company money by not having to pay more operators or customer service representatives. So in this simple example we have a technology that the company claims is for the benefit of their customers but really just increases the company’s profits.

Conclusion

So don’t let yourself be mislead, the leaders of nearly all companies are focused on one thing, improving the bottom line (profits). So it amazes, confuses, and maybe even angers me when a company announces something, and then denies that they are just trying to improve their profits or some other justification. Here’s an example ripped from recent headlines:

Intel + DRM = A crippled processor you have to pay extra to unlock

Intel upgrade card

“Intel’s net income was $2.89 billion, or 51 cents per share, in the quarter ended June 26. The last time Intel’s quarterly net income topped $2.5 billion was in 2000 during the dot-com heyday, when Internet fever fueled spectacular computer sales.”

So clearly, Intel is doing well, so why would they be nickel and dime-ing their customer base? Well in my opinion, there can only be one reason, greed. You have to examine the motivation for those tasked with ensuring the company’s “survival.” Why would the leaders of a company that is already extremely profitable be willing to short sell their customers in the name of increased revenues? Well when you put it that way, it leaves little to the imagination.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t dog Intel for wanting to earn more profits, what I can’t understand is putting profits before customer satisfaction. Then on the other hand, maybe there’s a reason I never made it into senior management. I tell everyone that most people have to turn to the dark side in order to make that last step into a senior executive position. Perhaps it’s that ability to put greed ahead of common decency that makes capitalists what they are.