-
AbhishekGakhar
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 9:28 am
- Thanked: 1 times
- Followed by:1 members
Issue
"A business should not be held responsible for providing customers with complete information about its products or services; customers should have the responsibility of gathering information about the products or services they may want to buy."
My response
The author is of the opinion that a business should not be held responsible for providing customers with complete information about its products or services. It is rather customers' responsibility to gather information about the products or services they want to buy. I differ with this opinion because it is not completely suited for our times where customer is the king, it suggests passivity for businesses and does not consider the need for certain corporate laws.
First of all, in this age where customer is the king, it is not very wise to suggest that customer's need to be handed over the responsibility to inform themselves about a product. A customer needs to make decisions about what he wants to buy and he needs the service of the business to make his decision. If the customer is given an additional task to completely inform himself about the product the customer's task becomes all the more difficult. This is against the principle of customer is the king.
Besides, if the opinion of the author was practical and reasonable most countries in the world will not have corporate laws such as the law of transparent advertising in Germany which clearly states that all businesses have the responsibility to clearly make the information regarding the technical features and pricing of their products transparent. The law goes further and states that businesses need to advertise for their products by assuming that the target customer has an average knowledge and understanding base. This shows that the law hands businesses this responsibility to provide their customers with the information regarding their products.
Furthermore, the author is trying to argue for a passive approach by businesses. In today's world of intense competition no business can afford to let its competitors win over customers. If the businesses wait for customers to inform themselves their competitors are bound to lure these customers away from the products of these businesses towards their products. While it is true that the customer knows best what he wants, he still needs to be assisted in every possible way. A good customer service is often one of the business strategies that wins over customers.
To sum it up, I do not agree with the weak and ill-reasoned opinion of the author because of the fact that seems to hand over customers with more responsibility in a time where customer is regarded as the king, that it propogates a passive approach for businesses and that it tries to render certain important corporate laws useless. To defend his case, the author needs to provide examples where customers got more due to less service by businesses and also shows that certain corporate laws can be modified in the best interest of customers.
"A business should not be held responsible for providing customers with complete information about its products or services; customers should have the responsibility of gathering information about the products or services they may want to buy."
My response
The author is of the opinion that a business should not be held responsible for providing customers with complete information about its products or services. It is rather customers' responsibility to gather information about the products or services they want to buy. I differ with this opinion because it is not completely suited for our times where customer is the king, it suggests passivity for businesses and does not consider the need for certain corporate laws.
First of all, in this age where customer is the king, it is not very wise to suggest that customer's need to be handed over the responsibility to inform themselves about a product. A customer needs to make decisions about what he wants to buy and he needs the service of the business to make his decision. If the customer is given an additional task to completely inform himself about the product the customer's task becomes all the more difficult. This is against the principle of customer is the king.
Besides, if the opinion of the author was practical and reasonable most countries in the world will not have corporate laws such as the law of transparent advertising in Germany which clearly states that all businesses have the responsibility to clearly make the information regarding the technical features and pricing of their products transparent. The law goes further and states that businesses need to advertise for their products by assuming that the target customer has an average knowledge and understanding base. This shows that the law hands businesses this responsibility to provide their customers with the information regarding their products.
Furthermore, the author is trying to argue for a passive approach by businesses. In today's world of intense competition no business can afford to let its competitors win over customers. If the businesses wait for customers to inform themselves their competitors are bound to lure these customers away from the products of these businesses towards their products. While it is true that the customer knows best what he wants, he still needs to be assisted in every possible way. A good customer service is often one of the business strategies that wins over customers.
To sum it up, I do not agree with the weak and ill-reasoned opinion of the author because of the fact that seems to hand over customers with more responsibility in a time where customer is regarded as the king, that it propogates a passive approach for businesses and that it tries to render certain important corporate laws useless. To defend his case, the author needs to provide examples where customers got more due to less service by businesses and also shows that certain corporate laws can be modified in the best interest of customers.
