A bad piece of meat will always be a bad piece of meat!

I don’t often go to Tesco to buy real food. Not only because I find it annoying how the people working there always seem to insist on packing the eggs first…and finish with the very heavy bottle of sparkling water….but mainly because I have a Waitrose around the corner (and really why would you go anywhere else?).

Well the other day, being in a hurry, I made an exception and popped into Tesco for some meet and vegetables. Nothing wrong with this meet, I think you’ll agree! I would go as far as saying a nice pair of steaks, and at an amazing price (£5 if I recall correctly)!

Well not so much! Getting ready to start cooking for my brother I opened the package, grabbed the steaks, and there it was, the whole ugly truth!

I will never understand why companies think deceiving customers in this way is a good idea. Yes you have succeeded to flog an item, or if you are a consultant a project…but the truth is a bad piece of meat will always be a bad piece of meat!

I usually put more thought into where I buy my dinner, and the one time I didn’t I ended up having to run for take away. Far from a disaster I agree, especially as I prefer Sushi to steak any day!

However, and on a more serious note, I’m often amazed at the criteria used by an organisation when choosing who to partner with, or who to hire as a supplier or consultant, where the stakes are a lot higher than buying meat.

There seems to be three extreme camps.

1) The decision of who to work with is often based on a shiny exterior like a fancy website, a cool office, or a flashy presentation at a conference, this without questioning the depth of the offer, or the long-term validity of the solution (yes the steak looks great!).

2) Or the decision is based on price, without much consideration for the lost opportunity of working with a lesser quality supplier, or the potential negative impact to the business following inexperienced advice can have (the steak was cheap!).

3) And finally, the selection criteria is based on size or brand name. We want to be seen to work with the biggest agency, consulting firm or organisation, ignoring that the high price tag that comes with working with these companies does not necessarily reflect the quality of the advice or work, but rather the high cost structure (OK so this one may not be relevant I hear you think, after all ‘every little helps’ is possible because Tesco is big – yes, but then what about quality?!).

Please don’t get me wrong; I’m not saying that any of the above will automatically lead to a disastrous outcome! Often it doesn’t.

What I’m saying is; when you base your decision of where to buy your meat simply on being in a hurry, and on the basis that it looks good from the outside, and when you think you got a real bargain because of a cheap price tag, don’t be surprised if you end up having to throw it away and run for Sushi.

If you choose your suppliers based on the wrong criteria, there is a chance that  you will end up wasting a lot of time, and money, in addition to potentially damaging your reputation.

So don’t do what I did, instead choose them based on their reputation and experience, in my case that would have meant going to Waitrose!

[del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »
2010
04/25
CATEGORY
Strategy
Thoughts
1 comment

  1. J’aime toujours autant le blog de Liri:
    sa démarche pédagogique (étude de cas), la qualité de l’illustration au sens théorique et pratique (la photo) qui incite à s’impliquer dans la réflexion, l’anecdote tirée du quotidien pour faire réfléchir à la façon dont l’entreprise doit prendre ses décisions.

    En français on dit ” on en a toujours pour son argent” pour expliquer que si l’on ne veut pas payer on ne peut obtenir ce que l’on attendait , même lorsqu’on “fait une affaire” on ne vous donne pas une Mercedes pour le prix d’ une Clio… et pourtant… individu ou entreprise (après tout, dans l’entreprise ce ne sont jamais que des hommes et des femmes qui prennent les décisions!) il arrive que ceux-ci croient au Père Noël et qu’on va leur faire cadeau de la Mercedes décrite dans le contrat….

    Le point qui m’a intéressée le plus? le fait qu’il s’agit d’un achat fait à la hâte : achats trop rapides parce que le temps a manqué, ou achats compulsifs destinés à pallier des manques sans rapport avec l’objet acheté, ou encore achats du collectionneur pour qui la valeur affective “n”a pas de prix”, dans tous les cas, on est loin, c’est vrai, d’une démarche posée, justifiée par une analyse, fût-elle rapide.
    Comment l’entreprise répond au besoin du client ( on devrait dire aux besoins)?
    Soyons juste si le prix doit simplement répondre à l’attente basique de nourriture, il suffira que le steack soit frais et tendre. Reste l’attente de ceux qui ont besoin d’être rassurés (traçabilité), de rêver (ah! la photo de cet animal dans un pré d’un charmant village avec le nom du berger entamant quelque “storytelling”!, ou de faire une affaire (mais oui!) et regarderont non le prix au kilo et la date de péremption, mais la grosse étiquette rouge indiquant un “prix rond”

    Et puis un dernier point : savez-vous que vos steaks si tendres issus le plus souvent de vaches en fin de carrière nourricière ne sont si tendres que parce que, à 90% , on fait passer un courant électrique dans la viande fraîchement abattue pour en attendrir les muscles?

  1. No trackbacks yet.