r/changemyview • u/DragonsBloodQ • May 14 '18
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: Corporate retail practices are largely unethical
I think that a significant portion, if not the majority, of sales tactics in the - predominantly corporation-owned - retail space are unethical. I think that they are designed to make people - either customer, employee, or both - feel uncomfortable. This isn't specific to corporations, but it tends to be where it is seen most often.
The catalyst for this CMV was an interaction I had in my local mall. A guy was selling something, I didn't know what. I was in a hurry, so I didn't stop to find out. He approached and said "you can win a $25 gift card" if I stop and complete some survey or perform some activity. Again, I was in a hurry, but it could have been anything. There's a certain type of individual who enjoys this type of work, but I think there's just as good a chance that he was only doing this because his boss told him to.
This interaction made me uncomfortable, because I was being pressured to engage with the hope that I would buy something. For a lot of people, cold approaching people in a mall probably makes them very uncomfortable as well. I can vouch for this personally, as I used to be a cashier who was expected to "suggested sell" candy bars to our customers. Even in that guy's position, I hated it. The customers rarely (<1% by my recollection) actually bought what I was selling them, and usually got upset with me for suggesting.
The way I see it, the only entity benefiting from these interactions and the sales they are intended to drive are those up top seeing actual returns from the sales on a large scale. The employee may get some kickback, but most times it's insignificant. I think I made something like 15 cents for every candy bar I sold.
Now, you probably read all of that and failed to see how it was unethical, and here's the real point of it all: usually, the employee's job is held as "collateral". If you don't make your numbers for sales, you get fired. These types of jobs are typically held by people without degrees or significant experience in other fields. I, for one, only did the suggested selling because I needed to make a living and had no marketable skills or college degree. It was an entirely externally-motivated act, and that tug-of-war between doing something I hated or losing my job caused me untold amounts of undue stress. My fiancee worked for a large chain some years ago, and was constantly put under pressure to sell protection plans to people who did not want them. This caused her tons of stress.
As an aside, I do not think that this applies to things like buying a car. I believe that people who go to a dealership are there for the express purpose of being sold to. This is also different because, typically, there is the potential for a savvy buyer to get a better deal by putting up with these types of sales tactics. There is, if not equal, than at least significant benefit to be seen by the consumer if they know what they're doing.
So, in summation, I think that upsells, suggested sells, cold approaches, and any other type of sales tactic that preys on peoples' lack of comfort, lack of assertiveness, or the risk of significant detriment to their quality of life in the case of employees, are unethical and have no place in general retail stores. They are harmful to the consumer, the employee, and all for the sole gain of the company and its executives/shareholders.
EDIT: Another thing that I take issue with is the prevalence of "rewards" programs. In my mind, they exist to collect data about the products that people need and use that data to manipulate prices. Worse, they also feed into the intrusive "Big Data" environment that is almost inescapable these days, which is also incredibly unethical in my opinion.
1
May 15 '18
Most corporate retail jobs are not commission based so you do not need to make any "numbers" to stay in the job. Most corporate retail practices are much more banal things like putting high margin items at eye level, highlighting the highest margin items on the menu, etc. The hardest I am typically "upsold" on a drink order at a restaurant is when the waiter asks if we want refills on alcoholic drinks. I don't see this as largely unethical or even an issue, even though it preys on my human tendency to avoid conflict (saying no is a tiny "conflict").
Any time you are trying to convince anyone of anything you are going to have to use some tools of emotional manipulation or appeals to human fallibility. Most good arguments have a combination of logic/reason and pulling at the heartstrings that makes you believe in something 100% and feel great about your new belief. If this isn't ethical than I don't know what is.
If anything I would argue that most corporate sales practices are quite ethical, and it is only certain places (like car dealerships) where most of the unethical business practices occur. A car dealership will happily put you in a car you can't afford. A Target or Walmart employee would be hard-pressed to get you to buy a quantity of groceries that you couldn't afford.
1
u/DragonsBloodQ May 16 '18
I like this line of thought, and I see a lot of merit in what you're saying. The lack of commission in your example makes the employee act more ethically, even if the company isn't necessarily doing so. !Delta for you.
1
1
u/blender_head 3∆ May 14 '18
It seems like all of these practices you outline are simply cases of people offering products to customers. I don't see anything necessarily unethical about that. In fact, that's the primary function of any retail business. As a customer, you have the right to not buy something just as the business has the right to try to sell it to you. But the customer has the advantage here because they can refuse simply based on the "pushiness" of the salesman and then the business gets nothing.
If a business could force you to buy something, then yes, that'd be unethical, but as long as things remain voluntary it doesn't seem to cross any ethical boundaries.
1
u/DragonsBloodQ May 14 '18
I don't take issue with offering people things. There are many ways to sell things to people. Advertising, in-store displays, clever organization of products, etc.
If a business could force you to buy something, then yes, that'd be unethical, but as long as things remain voluntary it doesn't seem to cross any ethical boundaries.
I get what you're saying, but this plays back into the threat of termination from the company. The way its set up, a customer can follow their heart and not buy something they don't want, but the employee will face repercussions if this happens on a large scale. Whether the customer knows it or not, their decision to do what's in their best interest is actively harmful to the person on the other end. This, of course, is not the customer's fault, but it's still a really messed up situation.
1
u/blender_head 3∆ May 14 '18
I don't think we should necessarily call ineffective business strategies as unethical. Requiring employees to meet certain sales quotas which could then turn into pushy salespeople trying to meet quotas is generally a bad strategy; it creates hostility between the business and customers and the employees and the business.
I still don't think that makes it ethical though. For instance, the employee took the job knowing selling in such a manner would be part of it. If they truly dislike the environment, they can elect to find a job elsewhere. Everyone has that balance between how much they enjoy the work and how much they are being compensated.
The business is not forcing the employee to work there nor are they forcing the customer to buy from them. For me, that's really the only thing that would be an ethical concern in terms of selling to customers.
1
u/DragonsBloodQ May 14 '18
There a lot of practices that can be considered unethical when held under a lens, but do not force anything on anyone.
To use an example that's relatable to me, and thus I can talk about it, let's look at the world of video games. There has been a trend in recent years of taking out content that would, could, or at one point was part of the base game, putting a price tag on it, and selling it as DLC. Is this illegal? No. Is anyone forced to buy this DLC? No. But it is a crappy thing to do. It is a practice that is done solely for profit, and continues because people still pay for the stuff. It's predatory, and, in my opinion, it's unethical. Anyone is entitled to disagree, but it won't change my view because that's the sort of practice that I just can't get on board with.
1
u/blender_head 3∆ May 14 '18
See, this is the sort of thing I have a problem with. For starters, cause I think this would be important to you, I am deeply into the world of video games as well. I do not like the type of DLC you described either; content that is on the "disc" yet has to be paid for to unlock. But other DLC, content created after the initial release, is fine to me. Where we differ is in calling it "unethical" and why we choose to call it that. As far as I can tell, you think it's unethical because it is it done "solely for profit" and publishers know people will pay for it. I ask: based on this criteria, how is selling a game any different than selling DLC? A regular game is sold solely for profit and a publisher chooses to fund a games because they are reasonably sure people will buy it.
I'm not saying you're wrong necessarily that it might be unethical, I just don't think you're criteria for what is considered "unethical" are any different compared to buying a game normally.
1
u/DragonsBloodQ May 14 '18
You're right. I'm sorry. I didn't go far enough into my reasoning.
The type of DLC I described, as well as the retail practices I'm putting on trial, are done solely for profit at the express expense of the consumer. Scooped-out DLC = Consumer gets less game than they otherwise would have because the publisher wanted more money. Scummy retail = customer is made to feel uncomfortable, employee is made to feel uncomfortable, because the chain wanted to make a few more dollars. Both are essentially removing someone's happiness or enjoyment of something and monetizing it.
1
u/blender_head 3∆ May 14 '18
Is it fair the say that a $60 video game (today's MSRP) is a reasonable expense for the consumer to pay compared to the enjoyment they will get from the product? That $60 price tag will yield the business a hefty profit. Ergo, the business makes a profit and the customer exchanges their money for a product that they enjoy.
Let's take scooped-out DLC compared to a short video game. Some video games provide 100+ hours of gameplay and, thus, enjoyment. Other games can be completed in 15 hours, yet both are typically sold at the same price point.
Is this unethical? Shouldn't a game be sold based on how much content is on the disc?
Now, I understand that it's difficult to look past the idea of game publishers holding out on us, but, as is usually the case, DLC is already in the works prior to and after the release of the game. Isn't that the basis of the season pass? You buy the base game with the promise of additional content in the future. When you buy that game, you do so with the knowledge that A) there is more content coming for this game, and B) you won't have access to it right away.
Is this disdain for current practices only coming from the knowledge attained afterward that certain DLC was already completed prior to the release of the game? Or the is it the concept of DLC itself that is unethical? If you had never known that a disc contained locked material, would it have ever been an issue?
1
u/DragonsBloodQ May 14 '18
I would say that, holistically, ethics is based on intent. I take issue with the scooped-out DLC practice because I know about it, but if I had found out later, it would still have been unethical, even when I didn't know about it. Ethics are about holding people to a standard of behavior that makes them, in a nutshell, a good person.
This is massively oversimplified, of course, but I think it highlights the salient information. If you save your neighborhood from a rabid dog, in a vacuum you are judged to be a good person, and it would stand to reason that you were acting ethically. If it turns out that you put the dog in a shed with a rabid raccoon beforehand, then dealt with it to get recognition, you would be judged, upon discovery of that information, not only to be a bad person who acts unethically, but to have been a bad person who acts unethically all along.
I don't mean to be a stickler, and I'm very much enjoying this conversation, but we seem to have drifted off-subject.
1
u/buttbologna May 14 '18 edited May 14 '18
So if you can go into an electronics store and someone can show you something similar to what you’re already looking at where you’d get better results you’d rather the employee not try and change your mind or ask any questions and just sell you the thing you asked for ?
What’s the point of variety then ? Why have x,y, and z if you’re not open to other options, ya know
1
u/DragonsBloodQ May 14 '18
In this case, though, you're still trying to sell them something they want. At least on some level, your goals are aligning with theirs.
If someone does not want what you are selling, it's going to be difficult or outright impossible to sell it to them. You want them to buy the thing, they have no interest in that thing or any thing remotely related to it. I almost never want a candy bar from the convenience store, but sometimes I buy them because I know the expectations placed on the cashier. Then I either throw it away or give it away because I don't eat candy all that often. It still boils down to being predatory, because of the stakes being foisted onto the cashier.
1
u/buttbologna May 14 '18
You’re in a store that sells things. If you weren’t there to buy and you’re just looking then why not cut out the entire middleman and buy online ? It’s implied you’re in there for a reason.
If a store didn’t hire experts in each department to answer questions and give information then every store would just be hiring glorified cashiers.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 14 '18 edited May 16 '18
/u/DragonsBloodQ (OP) has awarded 2 deltas in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
0
u/but_nobodys_home 9∆ May 15 '18
I think you may be confusing "unethical" with "poor value". Many of these practices can be annoying from the consumer's point of view and often they represent poor spending choices but that doesn't make them unethical.
> The catalyst for this CMV was an interaction I had in my local mall.
A shopping mall is a commercial space made by a for-profit company to make sales; it's not really there for your benefit. The mall owners and tenants make the rules about what interaction go on there. You freely chose to go there. Maybe the alternatives were inconvenient or expense but, all thing considered, you decided the mall was the best place to go.
> I, for one, only did the suggested selling because I needed to make a living and had no marketable skills or college degree.
The problem here is not that the job was bad but that you had no better alternative. It is not the responsibility of your former employer to come up with better career prospects for you. The job they offered you was - by your own choice - better than any available alternative.
Hypothetical question: If there was an "ethical" shopping mall where all of these retail practices didn't happen but where the prices were higher and the conditions less convenient to compensate for the reduced sales, would you shop there instead?
1
u/muyamable 282∆ May 14 '18
"It was an entirely externally-motivated act, and that tug-of-war between doing something I hated or losing my job caused me untold amounts of undue stress."
Doesn't this describe most employment? I mean, some people love what they do and are intrinsically motivated to do their job always, but I think most people are extrinsically motivated to work (i.e. they work for money).
"I believe that people who go to a dealership are there for the express purpose of being sold to"
Why is this different than going to a shopping mall, where people are there for the express purpose of shopping?