You are the Brand - someone please tell The Pool Company in Rivonia!

Right click and select 'open link in new window' to enlarge.

I’m constantly amazed by the naiveté of entrepreneurs and small business owners when it comes to brand reputation. They seem to think that their particular widget or service is the brand and that they can do and say as they wish without any implications for the reputation of their business. Yet they themselves are frequently the brand.

In an era when corporate governance is increasingly under close scrutiny, customers or clients unconsciously ask themselves this question: “Are you decent, upright, moral, ‘nice’ people with whom to do business?” You’d better be sure that you are. Your most informal (or unthinking) contact with a stakeholder or potential customer can have a huge and negative impact on your business.

I’ve written over the last few months about various small retailers who have fallen into this trap. Sometimes they’ve responded injudiciously to a complaint or issue. In most cases it’s been by e-mail or on the Internet. They either don’t realise or don’t care that those comments will ‘live forever’ in cyberspace. In complete contrast is a veterinary practice that I had occasion to use. I had what I regarded as an unacceptable experience with them. I wrote the practice partners and to their credit (I really hadn’t expected such an outcome) they responded to, revised or revamped every aspect I’d referred to. That’s taking a mature and professional approach to constructively-intended criticism.

A classic example of brand reputation-‘ignoring’ or ignorance, is one Zelma Wilson, who is the owner (according to her) of three companies, of which one is The Pool Company based in Rivonia South Africa. Zelma’s driver bashed into the back of my vehicle in their Pool Company branded pick-up truck in November 2004. I suspect the driver was talking on a mobile phone, but have no way of proving that.

I approached the Pool Company – to whit Zelma Wilson herself – and got little co-operation. It was almost as if I was being a pain in the backside by wanting them to make a nominal R 1 600 contribution to the repair of my rear bumper. I’d have thought she would be grateful that it didn’t involve her insurance company or any paperwork or admin on her behalf. Instead, she issued an unsigned cheque for the amount.

Without wishing to bore you with the detail, way too many wasted phone calls, messages, demands etc. have been issued to the Pool Company to re-issue the cheque or repay this money. Zelma Wilson, for some reason known only to her (she did say ‘We have budget’) has steadfastly refused to do so. It’s absolutely not about the money. It’s about the ethics involved. About the perceived character, or lack of, of the person representing the brand. Her actions indicate it to be wanting. That, in today’s business environment where governance issues play such a powerful role, is a dangerous place to be.

In corporate reputation terms, here’s my question: Could you or would you confidently do business with this woman or with the Pool Company if this is how she reacts to a self-admitted obligation (her issuing of the cheque in the first place acknowledges that)? You might wish to think about it. This is what I call behaving like a corporate cowboy – because there’s no thought being given to the knock-on effect of such ill-informed behaviour.

What Zelma Wilson’s missing in her inexcusable mis-management of the Pool Company obligation and reputation is this: Zelma is the brand. And she’s busy doing - or has already done - irreparable damage to it.