When is an issue not an issue?
In a former life I sold beer, not an unpopular occupation for a twenty something bachelor. On one occasion I visited the brewery and canning factory. The brewery wasn’t very exciting but the canning factory was mesmerizing. During the presentation of the canning system the production manager went into a long explanation into the advantages of steel cans over aluminium (or was it aluminium over steel), and ending by telling the assembled sales reps that if any customer expressed concern over the choice of material that the cans were produced from then he should be contacted directly and he would discuss the issue with … whoever. This statement was met with bemusement from the assembled sales people whose customers had no interest in what the can’s are made from.
It should not be assumed that what is an issue for a company is the same for the end-user. Take the recent obsession of tech companies with patents. We have seen the bankrupt telecommunication company Nortel bought for $4.5billion for its stock of patents. We even have websites dedicated to the subject. And we have a spate of tech companies suing and counter suing for reasons that to the lay person seem completely superfluous, but I suppose they have to do something with their mountain of cash.
But for the rest of us this obsession seems very boring and nonsensical. The latest dust-up between Samsung and Apple is a case in point. Apple have blocked the sale of Samsumg Galaxy 7.7 on the basis that
‘Samsung copied the design, look and feel of Apple’s popular iPhone and iPad devices.’
Not surprisingly Samsung has counter sued over something else, so obscure as to bring a new dimension to the term ‘spurious’. Now as an end-user product groups should have similar ‘design, look and feel’. This is what we want and expect; smoothly moving between different products without interference from tech companies. A tablet has particular functionality and ease of use. This is what make it the product it is. Every car works in essentially the same way. The pedals are in the same order, the direction indicators are on a stalk protruding from the steering column. The gear stick and hand-brake is in the same place on every car (except for those flappy paddle thingies, I wonder who holds the patent on the design look and feel of those!!). The steering wheel is round etc. Do Ferrari sue Lamborghini for producing a car that ‘copies the design, look or feel’ of their own product. No. Can you imagine this sort of mentality in past years. This Apple would have put a stop to QWERTY keyboards and force every company to come up with an original keyboard layout, making them unusable. (This is coming from someone typing on an AZERTY keyboard reconfigured to a QWERTY lay out. If you don’t know what a AZERTY keyboard is then think yourself lucky!!!!)
Apple have created the template for tablets, end-users expect tablets to be similar in function, just as they do cars, its part of the enjoyment. Get over it.
This obsession for tech companies to start patent wars hasn’t yet become a crisis, but the Samsung Galaxy case, denying access to a product just because another company doesn’t like the look of it may start to have an impact. Soon enough customers are going to start to lose patience with the denial of customer sovereignty and the realisation that the cost of such legal disputed is passed on to customers.
The issue of patent dispute is one that is of interest only to tech companies and will not lead to a crisis except if the continued reaction to competition is to pursue such matters through the law courts and not through product innovation and added value for end-users then customer confidence in a company such as Apple representing their best interests could develop into a ‘crisis of confidence’.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Graeme Lindsay
Corporate Reputation Resource Centre 