Skip to main content

A Spectacular Event

(Due to the launch of the Musicians For Haiti [M4h] website on Friday, this blog entry has been intentionally delayed to allow more time for the important blog entry heralding its arrival.)

Edit: updated to include the skepticism that Toyota and others have about the incident in San Deigo.

We are all witnesses to a spectacular event. All of us will one day be able to tell our grandchildren, "I was there when Toyota got flushed down the toilet like yesterday's fast food." And yet to be observers only would be a disservice to ourselves, for it is always easier to learn from the mistakes of others than to repeat the same mistakes ourselves and look like idiots as a result.

Toyota has failed on several fronts, but there are two that I'd like to highlight.

They failed to be true to their vision. I remember the days when Toyota was the car to beat. The Camry has been the best selling car until this fiasco occurred and had been for the prior seven years. Instead of realizing that being in a position of superiority makes you a target for every other automobile manufacturer, they rested on their laurels and allowed the quality to of their products to wane.

They failed to be honest. When the problems first surfaced, they had a moral responsibility to tell their customers what they knew; what they were doing to alleviate the issues; what the current status of the testing of their proposed solutions was; and what the expected time to resolution was. Furthermore, they owed it to their customers to not do this once, nor twice, but weekly until they were 1,000% certain they had fixed the problem completely.

Instead, they attempted to stem the loss of revenue by doing just the opposite. Specifically, they claimed that they a) knew the cause of the acceleration and b) had a fix that worked. But as the 61 year old driver of a Toyota Prius recently found out, neither of these were true. In that article, he tells how he was turned away when he brought in his Prius as part of the recall because supposedly his car wasn't affected.

(Of course, immediately I wrote this entry came the flood of stories including this one attacking the credibility of the driver. There are factually accurate statements about dishonest activities and significant debt incurred by that person, so perhaps his story doesn't hold water after all.)

The net result is that the losses they will now suffer are going to be far worse than had they simply owned up to the responsibility they owe to their customers. Instead of admitting that they do not have all of the answers yet, they lied and now their credibility is sinking faster than the Titanic.

I'm not naive - I know that, in business, image is everything. How you are perceived has a direct impact on your career, financial well-being, etc. Yet there must be a recognized line in the sand where we realize that we cannot hide from the responsibilities we must accept for the actions we do. At that point, we simply must admit to the failures at hand and "let the chips fall where they may" (as my father once said); let ourselves be judged by the court of public opinion; and then make the necessary adjustments to ensure that we don't make the same mistakes again.

Renowned psychiatrist Frank Pittman once stated that infidelity is not "whom you lie with. It's whom you lie to." While he was referring to infidelity in relationships, we must apply this to our lives as professionals and representatives of the companies for whom we work. You can lie with the Spirit of Slothfulness (when it comes to producing a quality product or service; excelling as an employee; etc.) but don't lie to those that have a vested interest in the fruits of your labor if things do not go the way you intend them to.

Popular posts from this blog

"Ni jiang yi yang de hua ma?"

Last week, I wrote about the necessity of having a clear message . Because this topic is so important I decided to follow-up with another entry on this general subject. This week we will approach it from another angle. (For the curious, the title says " Do you speak the same language? " in pinyin, which is a transliterated Mandarin Chinese.) Recently, a good friend of mine (who is Chinese, ironically) and I were playing pool. He had to bank the 8-ball in the pocket to win the game, and since it was an informal game and bank shots are my area of expertise, he asked me for advice. I told him, "you just need to strike the cue ball with medium speed so that it hits the 8-ball right in the middle." He didn't believe me so we marked the positions of the balls, and then he took his shot only to watch the 8-ball sail past the pocket. "A-ha!" he exclaimed. "I told you it wasn't that easy." But when we reset the positions and I made an attemp

It's Easier to Fail at DevOps than it is to Succeed

Slippery when wet Since the term DevOps was coined in Belgium back in 2009, it is impossible to avoid the term whether in discussions with colleagues or in professional trade magazines.  And during the years while this movement has gained momentum, many things have been written to describe what elements of a DevOps strategy are required for it to be successful. Yet in spite of this, there is an interesting data point worth noting: not many organizations feel there is a need for DevOps.  In a Gartner report entitled DevOps Adoption Survey Results (published in September 2015),  40%  of respondents said they had no plans to implement DevOps and 31% of respondents said they hadn't implemented it but planned to start in the 12 months after the survey was conducted. That left only 29% who had implemented DevOps in a pilot project or in production systems, which isn't a lot. "Maybe it's because there truly isn't a need for DevOps," you say.  While that

Is No/Low-Code the Key to IT Nirvana?

 Unless you've had your head in the sand for the past year or so, you've seen the phrases low-code  and no-code  bandied about quite frequently everywhere you look.  You've probably wondered if this is something new that's here to stay or just a "flash in the pan."  Although the terms have been in the fore of the IT trade publications recently, Low Code Development Platforms (LCDP) (and the corresponding No Code Development Platforms) have been in existence since 2011.  Their roots can be traced to the 90's with 4th generation programming languages and GUI-assisted programming paradigms, e.g. IBM VisualAge for Basic, which was discontinued in 1998. For those of you who aren't familiar with either, the premise is that these platforms allow someone to quickly build applications using a WYSIWYG interface and a "click and configure" paradigm to Isn't this the source code to Roblox? rapidly build full applications with little or no coding requ