Truth in Advertising, aka Why Salespeople Aren’t Marketers: Serta and Stupid Marketing

Over the last few months, I’ve noticed that the mattress I’ve been sleeping on isn’t really flat any more. It has a distinct topography, which persists even after sliding a board under it.

Luckily, after consulting the mattress tag, internet, and original chooser of the mattress (not me, long story), it turned out that the mattress was covered by a guarantee.

Unfortunately, that word – “guarantee” – is one of the most abused marketing terms ever.

For example, who determines that a mattress has failed, and is eligible for replacement under the guarantee?

Answer: a third-party verification company (no kidding, I’ve met a for-real certified mattress inspector).  This is good. Not so good, it took five phone calls, extensive paperwork, location of obscure 10-year old documents (really!) and a discussion over whether the $35 inspection fee would be paid by Serta.

That said, Serta agreed that the mattress would be replaced under its guarantee.

But Serta Mattress Company’s “guarantee” states in part that “…the manufacturer reserves the right to substitute materials of equal quality”.

Which resulted in an interesting conversation between me and the local sales rep, Darrow Crowe, in which Mr. Crowe quoted that phrase and stated that the replacement mattress would have a lower coil count, unless I’d like to pay for an “upgrade” to my current mattress’ coil count. (!)

Of course, Mr. Crowe didn’t want to put that statement in writing.

Again, let’s look at the situation:

1. Marketing goal of a guarantee: make the consumer feel safe in purchasing an item. The fear of making a “bad choice” and being cheated goes away with a guarantee. Smart.

2. Legal language in the guarantee: designed for Serta’s protection, so that an evil consumer can’t demand replacement of a ten-year old mattress with materials not made in ten years. Reasonable.

3. Salesperson interpretation of the guarantee: an opportunity to upsell and increase commissions for that quarter.

So where am I going with this, and what’s the marketing moral?

My point is that if a marketing term like “guarantee” is to keep its value, it must be honored. Otherwise it becomes simply noise, like the phrase “new and improved”.

Having the sales team administer the “guarantee” is effectively a “guarantee” that the term won’t be honored.

Moral of the story: Don’t ask sales to market – they’re there to close. Marketing, and only marketing, should ultimately own and be responsible for fulfilling on the implied – or “guaranteed” truth behind marketing promises.

--------
blog.stupidmarketing.com is now also a podcast! Click on the "play" arrow...

Download | Duration: 00:03:22

Please buy my book.  http://buynow.stupidmarketing.com -- and tell your friends

 del.icio.us  Stumbleupon  Technorati  Digg 

 
Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this entry.
Comments

  • 4/10/2008 8:59 PM Serta customer service wrote:
    The Serta warranty offered on bedding is clearly defined as to what is considered a defect.

    If I could have this Serta customers name I will research to see if his mattress has any manufacturing defects as reported by the 3rd party inspection company.

    The warranty provides a comparable replacement to a defective product.

    Every year mattress styles change, but Serta is always fair in the replacement product offered.


    [KEVIN REPLIES:]

    To whomever from Serta left the comment on my blog (wow, they were too ashamed to leave their name)...

    Did you actually -read- the blog entry on which you commented?

    Because if you had, or you read it again, you’d see that it:

    A. States in the first line that -I- was the customer. I'm not hard to contact.

    B. Points out that I did go through the Serta process and was approved for a new mattress. We're not arguing about whether the mattress was defective. It was, Serta agreed.

    C. Questions the approach used, not the outcome. It was a painful process to get Serta to remedy a defect. A person of lesser persistance might not have prevailed.

    D. Names the Serta sales rep involved. Quite a slippery character.

    My post stands. And I'm additionally depressed that Serta can afford to hire people (ok, they went for the cheap, inarticulate ones, but they hired 'em) to seek out and attempt to "neutralize" negative blogs... instead of putting that money into fixing the root causes, like poor service and slippery reps.

    Aieee.

    - KE


    Reply to this
Leave a comment

Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Enter the above security code (required)

 Name (required)

 Email (will not be published) (required)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.