Ultimately, what matters to any business is the ability to generate revenue. The more diverse the sources of revenue, the better the prospects for the business. Likewise, the fewer and narrower the sources, the higher the risks to the business.

Sometimes business earns income because it has superior offerings, capabilities and the brand, among others. Sometimes, earnings are from customer patriotism and sentimentality (loyalty, familiarity, proximity, tradition etc). Other times, out of the generosity and general good behaviour of employees.

One thing is clear, unless your business is a monopoly, arrogance, self-centeredness and unpleasantness towards customers will not bring them through the doors of your business. By Nimroth Gwetsa, 30 November 2019.

Let’s truly be honest with ourselves, kindness and general good behaviour towards others makes us attractive to them. These qualities open their hearts to reciprocally reflect or express their kindness and goodness towards us. Thus, good begets good and can result in more sales for the business.

On the other hand, arrogance, stinginess and unkindness, among others, repel people, and in a business, without customers there would be no sales and the business will soon fold.

Clearly, there is a return for general goodness. Why then do many companies fail to do good to keep attracting customers and earning much needed income?

Many see doing good as a premium costing money they feel would not be refundable or redeemable through increased sales. The economy of general goodness is clear even if it cannot be quantified.

No customer would want to buy on sentimental grounds, let alone even on pure economic terms, from a business renowned for arrogance, selfishness or plain unkindness. Customers with more income and discretion would rather incur a premium transacting with a different business elsewhere, even if it is far, just to avoid giving money to a company giving bad experience. The benefits of goodness are so obvious, they do not warrant us writing about them, yet we continue to see many businesses failing to do good.

I do not know for how long some business managers or owners would think they can continue duping unsuspecting customers, promising them lies and being uncaring soon after the deal. Many consumer watchdogs continue to be inundated with complaints from customers of businesses failing to honour their obligations or ensuring the customer is satisfied with the product or services rendered. They tend to be reluctant spending money ensuring customer satisfaction to avoid losing money from disgruntled customers.

I do not know why they see customer unhappiness as an isolated incident worthy of being ignored. I wonder if they do not believe such behaviour would not affect deals from other customers. Do they not see good reviews as an attractive force bringing in more customers?

Many small-businesses seem to have no tolerance for returns. Perhaps owing to their low profit margins, they regard spending money fixing an unworkable solution would mean running at a total loss. If small businesses have little room for “comebacks”, they should invest more in making quality integral to the lifecycle of the solution development. Integrated quality assurance is one of the best ways of ensuring fewer comebacks and wastages.

I have heard similar stories about fitment and furniture companies specialising in all sorts of woodwork and leather, from kitchen and bedroom cupboards of all sorts to luxury leather furniture and some interior decoration. Names shall be withheld to protect the innocent.

One such company offered “make-to-order” products, enabling increased customisation of different products and underlying material used. As a result, the company did not keep stock or excess material from which customers could choose. Material would first be ordered from suppliers often internationally based, leading to prolonged lag in supply. Faced with such a situation, the company did not guarantee prices but changed them closer to the arrival of material ordered. Even labour costs would not be fixed but changed owing to delays in time of the arrival of the material.

This company has been in business for years. They knew of delivery time lag, of specialised material they sold, yet they were not truthful upfront about the possible delays in the delivery of materials. They did not disclose possible delays fearing loss of the deal should customers not accept prolonged timelines. To protect themselves and make it harder for the customer to cancel, they would then ask for a hefty deposit, often more than 50% of the total estimated price, payable before any material could be ordered.

Once the deposit is paid and material ordered, they would then give customers one excuse after the other explaining reasons for delays. Suddenly, the material ordered could not be delivered alone unless the container on a ship in which the material was stored, was full. They gave an excuse that the container took about three months to fill. Three months later, customers were then told the ship was experiencing difficulties elsewhere and that there would be a few additional weeks of delays. Finally when material arrived after much delays, customers were again told suppliers sent through the wrong version of the material and that customers would either need to wait few more months for their correct order to be sent, or they take the incorrectly delivered material instead. Even then, customers were not afforded a reduction in price as a small concession and consolation for disappointing them.

When customers wanted to cancel the deal and incur whatever penalties the company would want to levy, the company would refuse to refund them citing commitment of their available funds on other projects. Customers were thus forced to persevere and see the deal to the end.

When their product was finally built, its delivery and installation were then delayed until they would agree to paying, beforehand, the balance and any other price adjustments owing to currency fluctuations and staff wage increases given during prolonged delays.

By then there would be increased animosity between the parties and all customers would be interested in was having the job completed quickly and wishing to never deal with anyone from the company again. In the end, customers were then just happy their product was finally delivered. Their consolation was that their products were well-made and pleasing to possess.

Not many of those customers complained on consumer sites to warn others about the company. Many, refrained from doing so to protect themselves in the event they would need repairs later. The company kept doing business with many unsuspecting customers.

No wonder it took a long time before they company folded, but when evil finally caught up with them, owners lost everything, including their personal possessions.

I do not purport to have the answers, but I would believe honesty is the best medicine. Customers are usually attracted to the creativity, quality and uniqueness of the product that they would be willing to do business with the company even if there were delays. So long as full disclosure was made upfront. Even when delivery was prolonged, the company should have made plans to offer customers some temporary solution while waiting for completion of their customised products. Customers would have been better prepared for unforeseen other expenses if the truth and issues were disclosed prior to conclusion of the deal than only after they were “locked in”.

In the end, arrogance, unkindness and general lack of generosity ultimate led to the destruction of the business.

Honesty, boldness and calmness pay more than desperation and untruthfulness.

Be kind, generous and humble for your success.