The name and shame game

To shame or not to shame? That is the question. At least that was the question posed between myself and the readers in last week's post. The lines were pretty clear, they were for and I was against.

With shows like Fair Go and Target, and Trade Me 'feedback" a household term, it's no wonder we all feel that if someone has done us wrong we can, with not too much effort, get our story out and expose the person or company for the swines they are. "What a great idea!" we all shout. But like any story worth telling (or hearing for that matter) there are always two sides.

Fair Go was the first example I can remember of the consumer fighting back. Week after week we Kiwis watch with glee as the spirited team of reporters-as-investigators follow leads, make recorded phone calls and track down the offending party before ramming the camera in their face so they in turn can ram their opened palm straight back into the lens.  I love it. We love it.

What Fair Go doesn't show us is the meticulous fact checking, background research and even abandoned cases that turn out to be a little more complex than just good verses bad. Why? Well because it doesn't make good TV - but this legwork done behind the scenes does make for a good process of mediation and resolution.

Next to arrive on the scene was Trade Me, a brilliant buy/sell system based on the trust between two parties, mediated at its core by the trusted Trade Me staff. Again I remember very clearly my first few rounds with both an offending seller and, in my own business, a disgruntled customer. That little blue smiley face, oh how it haunts the Trade Me user.

Initially Trade Me offered just a basic system for feedback, where the buyer and seller could only comment on their side of a transaction. But soon enough someone at the site realised things were not always that cut and dry and a new system was added which allowed both parties to explain the feedback they had received, and in doing so would give a much more complete view of what had occurred between RADTIMES666 and THEJONESFAMILY in the sale of three very nice pre-loved deck chairs that ended up being full of termites. In short, it gave people reading it the full story.

So here we are, 2010, and along with the TV shows and trading websites we also have the ability, sometimes all too easily, to tell the world the woes of being a customer via thousands of blogs, forums, tweets and video clips. "Hooray!" we all shout. The age of open, moderated consumerism is upon us. But where are the Fair Go style checks and balances? Well, there really aren't any. No big concern for the general consumer with nothing to lose but some time, just get online, vent your anger and bugger the due process. Not what I would do as a business owner, but it was what Steve Taylor, director of mediation service 24-7 Ltd, thought was the best option when faced with a disagreement over some plumbing work done by Atlas Plumbing at his private home and the argued sum of no less than $40. Mr Taylor got very alarmingly pro-active, in fact, and started a blog where he created his own press releases which were in turn picked up by the national papers. Both his company and that of Atlas Plumbing were thrown, warts and all, into the public arena for all to judge. Not a nice place to be airing your business issue, we can all agree.

The risk of taking this sort of drastic measure is obvious, even more so if the company you direct earns its bread and butter from mediation. This didn't seem to bother Mr Taylor. The story was also quickly posted on an international property investment forum for other business owners and peers to pick apart and find their own decision over who was right and who was wrong. It seemed that open moderated consumerism had returned to the fray, but not necessarily to the benefit of the instigator, Mr Taylor. As with all stories, the open forum allowed more and more information to come out and both parties to air there perspectives in the public arena. Again, would I have done this? Hell no.

When you become a business owner, or even a high ranked employee of a business, every action you take should be carried out with the integrity of your company foremost in mind, and therefore preceded by a lot of time thinking "could this backfire and is it really worth it?" For $40 and about 10 hours of time better spent by Mr Taylor on his 'cause', I think most of us would cry "HELL NO!"

James Crow is the Auckland-based entrepreneur behind Pot of Gold skin balm and After Ink tattoo aftercare. He blogs about life as a startup entrepreneur each week for Unlimited