IN SEARCH OF INTEGRITY
By Mel Copen November 3, 1999
I was traveling from Tokyo to Kobe on one of those rare, cloudless, blue-sky days in Japan. As the bullet train sped by, there was Mt. Fuji in striking splendor, snow capped and brilliantly clear. I normally carry a small camera when I travel and I hurriedly pulled it out of my brief case to catch the scene. Later, in Osaka, I changed to a more conventional train and soon thereafter arrived at my destination. Only then did I realize that my camera was missing. Thinking back, I remembered – I had put it in the pouch on the back of the seat in front of me, keeping it handy in case there might be other photogenic scenes along the way. Scratch one camera!
I mentioned my loss to my host. “No problem,” he said. “When we get to the office, we’ll contact the Osaka railway station.” Sure enough. On my way back to Tokyo I was able to retrieve my camera from the lost and found department at the Osaka station (they had actually offered to forward it to me in Kobe).
I probably shouldn’t have been surprised. A few months earlier I had left a hat on a train to Tokyo and got it back the next day. If you saw my hat you might not be surprised, but a camera? And then there was the time my wife “lost” a small suit case in Tokyo station, and – you guessed it – also retrieved it from “Lost and Found.” Actually, it was never lost. An employee saw it on the platform, thought it was unattended, and turned it in so that it wouldn’t get lost.
More recently, here at home I had a problem revolving around a credit card. The card I was using had been issued several years ago. The name of the card was that of a leading worldwide financial institution (lets call it WFI). The card was the color of a precious metal most preferred by cardholders. The literature, which accompanied the mail offer, explained that the card being offered was far superior to the less-precious-metal colored card that I had previously held and that the old account would be transferred to the new. Sounded good. Somewhere, however, there must have been some fine print that I missed.
My problem arose when WFI came out with a special airline fare offer for holders of its very precious metal colored cards. Wow! Sounded great! We made all the arrangements, including a substantial commitment for a tour at the destination. However, when the travel agent went to process the charge for the tickets, she was informed that my card was not “real” and that I was not entitled to the airfare deal. But my card had the financial institutions name on it, and the precious metal appeared not only in color, but also in writing. How could this be? When I called WFI, the response: “your card was issued by a bank (whose name did not appear on the card), and the fact that it bears our name and color does not make it our card.” It is hard to conclude that this effective camouflage had little purpose other than to mislead the consumer – in this case, namely me. It worked.
A few weeks ago, the newspapers carried a larger number of advertisements placed by long distance telephone services. Various companies were claiming superiority over the others. The focus was on price. One full-page ad caught my attention, as it was supposed to do. The words that jumped out at me were: “Simple,” “7¢,” and “No Games.” None of the letters was less than half an inch high, and some were over 4 inches tall. But I looked at the entire ad, and very closely. There, at the very bottom, in the corner, in tiny print about 1/16 of an inch high, was a little notation about a $5.95 monthly fee. What does this mean? Well, if you use the phone for 100 minutes per month, the cost per minute is not 7¢ but 12.95¢ (7 + 595/100). At 500 minutes usage per month, the total cost would still be over 8¢ per minute. No Games? I wonder what the situation would be “with games?”
Each of the above is a giant company – each has worldwide respect and reputation for delivering quality service. Why then resort to this type of subterfuge? Does this belong in the same dimension as the experience on the Japanese railways? What is the standard that applies? Is it really necessary to mislead to compete effectively?
Most people have no problem with the proposition that it is in the best interests of society to have good companies stay in business. To do so, they have to charge fees that cover their costs and provide a return on capital and compensation for the risks that they take. Why can’t companies just say so and price accordingly?
Perhaps the thing that has me most puzzled about situations like the above is that, in conversations, many people don’t see this as a problem. They have come to accept such behavior as the norm and pass it off as typical “advertising hype.” And obviously, that also applies to the executives within these companies who make the decisions that result in such actions.
You and I set the standards by which we live. Over time, we can raise these standards or we can lower them – it all depends not only on what action we take, but what actions we tolerate. Children are fantastic learners. They see a great deal of what goes on and accept the standards of their role models – parents, teachers, prominent sports and entertainment figures. This gives rise to a generational spiral. It can be up or down. The issue is how to get people to recognize the collective responsibility we all have to establish and maintain high standards. Integrity is one of the most precious qualities we have.
A number of years ago I had the opportunity to meet with the then Vice President of the United States. It was a small group. A controversial subject came up and he voiced his personal opinion, which was totally different from the party line that he supported in public. I expressed my surprise at his viewpoint. He explained that his public utterances were based on “the first responsibility of a politician – to get reelected. If he is out, he can’t accomplish anything.” I naively asked “but weren’t you selected to provide leadership?”
Each of us is a leader in his or her own right. We can put things on a positive trend line just as easily as we can move it in the opposite direction – not only by what we say, but also by the examples we set for others. Next time you see something that doesn’t look right, withhold your support and write to the people concerned. And next time you see something that does look good, write to them too.
—————–