“Speaking of Amway, what are YOUR thoughts on…?”

This past Friday, May 23, 2008, U.S. Magistrate Judge Don D. Bush of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas handed down his ruling regarding Amway/Quixtar’s arbitration agreement in a case pursued by Ron Simmons and several other members of TEAM.  In this ruling the judge vacated a previous order in the Court referring this case to arbitration and ruled Friday that the case must now proceed in the judge’s Court.  I have posted the judge’s entire ruling below (it was only five legal pages long) so you won’t have to chase it down on Wikipedia.  (Thanks to ‘Tex’ for sending me the .pdf file.)

This ruling, and a couple of other recent ones, will likely have an impact (how significant remains to be seen) on several recent TEAM cases and Quixtar’s arbitration agreement.  On February 8, 2008, on the Alticor Media Blog, the blog’s moderator, in speaking to the dismissal of the Nitro case stated: 

“And another important point: Contrary to some of the spinners out there, the ruling hinges on the fact that the dispute is so very old—beginning before 1998, before we even had an arbitration program. Therefore, the effect of this ruling on our current arbitration program and current cases (a shrinking list, given the Nitro dismissal) is virtually zero. If someone’s telling you otherwise, don’t buy the hype.”

Well, it’s obvious the judge in this case clearly disagrees with the blog moderator’s assessment of the matter.  Apparently “virtually zero” isn’t “absolute zero.”  However, this is not a final ruling on the merits of the case itself, so we will have to wait to hear how the specific case itself plays out.  

Several lines in the ruling stand out to me and I have highlighted them in red italics.  Here is Judge Bush’s ruling:   

[Page] 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS -SHERMAN DIVISION

RON and LISA SIMMONS, § BRENTERPRISES, L.P., CHARLES § SCOTT TYKES, JR., d/b/a CSS § TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATES § SYKES & ASSOCIATES,

§ Plaintiffs, §

v. § C ASE NO. 4:07cv389 §

§ QUIXTAR, INC., §

§ Defendant. §

ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ARBITRATION

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration of Order of Stay (Dkt. 83). This case involves a business dispute between certain Quixtar business distributors and Quixtar.  Essentially, the distributors sued Quixtar for breach of contract, and interference with prospective and business relations. Soon after this case was filed, the Court heard evidence on Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction and recommended that the motion be granted in part. Thereafter, Quixtar filed a motion for arbitration under its distributor agreements with certain of the Plaintiffs. After hearing the arguments of the parties and over the objection of Plaintiffs, that motion was granted and the case was referred to arbitration for resolution. The court notes that Plaintiffs’ opposition to the arbitration sufficiently preserved its argument that there was no valid arbitration agreement.

Plaintiffs now seek reconsideration of the Court’s order staying this case pending arbitration in light of a recent decision issued by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals involving Amway, Quixtar’s

Case 4:07-cv-00389-MHS-DDB Document 88 Filed 05/23/2008 Page 1 of 5

predecessor. The Court, after hearing the argument of the parties at the hearing held on May 22, 2008 and noting the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Morrison v. Amway, finds that the arbitration clause in the case sub judice is the same as that in Morrison and that the language from the Court’s opinion that follows sums up the matter before the Court and requires that the Motion for Reconsideration be granted:  There is no express exemption of the arbitration provisions from Amway’s ability to unilaterally modify all rules, and the only express limitation on that unilateral right is published notice. While it is inferable that an amendment thus unilaterally made by Amway to the arbitration provision would not become effective until published, there is nothing to suggest that once published the amendment would be inapplicable to disputes arising, or arising out of events occurring, before such publication.

* * *

There is nothing in any of the relevant documents which precludes amendment to the arbitration program-made under Amway’s unilateral authority to amend its Rules of Conduct-from eliminating the entire arbitration program or its applicability to certain claims or disputes so that once notice of such an amendment was published mandatory arbitration would no longer be available even as to disputes which had arisen and of which Amway had notice prior to the publication. There are no Halliburton type savings clauses which preclude application of such amendments to disputes which arose (or of which Amway had notice) before the amendment.

Morrison v. Amway Corp., 517 F.3d 248, 254, 257 (5th Cir. 2008).

Before the Court is the same agreement scrutinized by the Fifth Circuit. The material terms of Rule 1 and Rule 11 in the parties’ agreements here are the same as those examined by the Fifth Circuit in Morrison. While the agreements allow for distributor input prior to any amendment to the arbitration provisions, Quixtar still retains the unilateral right to do as it sees fit. The fact that the Morrision case dealt with matters which occurred before the arbitration clause was inserted in the

Case 4:07-cv-00389-MHS-DDB Document 88 Filed 05/23/2008 Page 2 of 5

[Page] 3

Rules of Conduct does not change the Circuit’s holding that the contract was merely illusory.  Quixtar attempts to distinguish Morrison on four grounds. First, it argues that Morrison dealt with a retroactive application of a requirement to arbitrate. The Court agrees. However, a close reading of the Fifth Circuit’s opinion indicates that the Court’s decision is not predicated on that sole ground. The Court’s reasoning applies to the Rules of Conduct and Amway’s (Quixtar’s) ability to unilaterally change the rules of the game. The 1998 contract before the Court in Morrison provided that “Amway reserves to itself the sole right to adopt, amend, modify, supplement or rescind any or all of these Rules, as necessary with respect to Rules enforcement.” Introduction to The Rules of Conduct of an Amway Distributor (emphasis added). Amway acknowledges that from time to time the contents of its various documents may be changed. Although it represents it will present such changes to the distributor board, final decision making authority rests with Amway (Quixtar).

Quixtar admits that the preface to its Rules of Conduct has not materially changed since 1998. It was this preface that appears to have drawn the Circuit’s attention and, in this Court’s opinion, the ultimate rationale for its holding that the arbitration contract was merely illusory. A promise is illusory if it does not commit the promisor to perform. Alex Sheshunoff Mgm’t Servs., L.P. v. Johnson, 206 S.W. 3d 644 (Tex. 2006). Quixtar argues that the Rules governing arbitration do not permit it to amend the Rules once arbitration has commenced. That is what the arbitration provisions state in part. However, Quixtar has left itself ample “wiggle” room by providing that it may modify the Rules of Conduct as it sees fit. The same provision appears to have been before the Circuit in Morrison. Quixtar presents this scenario to its distributors, you agree to arbitrate but we reserve the right to change the rules whenever it suits Quixtar. Therefore, Quixtar’s first point is

Case 4:07-cv-00389-MHS-DDB Document 88 Filed 05/23/2008 Page 3 of 5

[Page] 4

overruled.

Second, Quixtar argues that Morrison dealt with matters that predated the unilateral imposition of an agreement to arbitrate, and therefore, on that ground, it is distinguishable. The Court disagrees. The language of the Circuit’s opinion addressed this issue but decided the issue on the basis that the ability to change the rules at any time made the contract merely illusory.

Third, Quixtar argues that the Circuit did not address the point that any change requires distributor input. However, the old rules so provided, and, in fact, Quixtar is still free to do whatever it decides.

Quixtar’s last point is that the distributor’s performance under these yearly agreements with the arbitration clause amounts to consideration and perforce a valid and enforceable contract. Under Texas law, an illusory promise can still serve as a basis for a valid unilateral contract if accepted by performance. Alex Sheshunoff Mgm’t Servs., 206 S.W. 3d at 644. Quixtar points out that the distributors have enjoyed the fruits of their agreements in the way of sales and bonuses for a period of well in excess of ten years. Suddenly, the hue and cry is that the arbitration contract is illusory.

Under the contract before the Court, Quixtar could still amend the arbitration provision even after arbitration began. Quixtar could not amend the rules governing how the arbitration is conducted. In other words, how the arbitrator is selected could not be changed. But the Court sees no prohibition as to Quixtar changing the rules on what matters would be subject to arbitration.  To borrow a page from these parties, this Court is bound by the rules and decisions of its upline decision-makers, and further discussion and analysis is pointless. This Court is bound by the Fifth Circuit’s holding in Morrison regarding the specific arbitration provisions at issue here.

Case 4:07-cv-00389-MHS-DDB Document 88 Filed 05/23/2008 Page 4 of 5

[Page] 5

Therefore, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration of Order of Stay (Dkt. 83) is GRANTED and it is further recommended that the order referring this matter to arbitration (Dkt. 56) be VACATED and that the case proceed in this Court.

Within ten (10) days after service of the magistrate judge’s report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(C).

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations contained in this report within ten days after service shall bar an aggrieved party from de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings and recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings accepted or adopted by the district court except on grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 148 (1985); Rodriguez v. Bowen, 857 F.2d 275, 276-77 (5th Cir. 1988).

Case 4:07-cv-00389-MHS-DDB Document 88 Filed 05/23/2008 Page 5 of 5

written by Chuck Lia

Serious enough that IBOs should ask themselves whether they are ready to keep pace.  Are we ready for the challenge?

Last year, Alticor (and Amway, Quixtar) announced a major rethink in how they do business, including hints about how they intend to take back control of and manage their foundational brand, the Amway name. Along the way, a number of other changes have been rolled out on a manageable, test-and-iterate game plan.

A few examples, but not an exhaustive list:

* changes to and a move toward standardizing certain parts of how the business plan is shown to prospects

* enforcement of company rules designed to protect the core brand, including the willingness to bleed along the way for the sake of long term integrity; and by that I allude to their refusal to be blackmailed by TEAM leadership

* an Accreditation process which among other things is designed to build stronger Company/Motivational System collaborations, and guarantee a more reliable “brand experience,” as Chuck (and Harry Beckwith) indicated. [aside: have you taken Chuck’s advice in his post and signed up for your free marketing newsletter from Harry Beckwith?]

* significant increases in bonuses at all levels, and other motivational rewards aimed at prioritizing retail selling and increasing immediate focus on IBO Personal Profit Centres (ie. First Circle profits)

* introduction of a new department devoted to training, headed by new VP Alison Hague, and hiring some of the best and most experienced training and course developers around — including partnering with successful IBOs to develop new courses – and establishment of Quixtar University

* hiring of product development experience in the person of new Quixtar Managing Director Steve Lieberman, and introduction of new lines of fresh retailable products – Simply Nutrilite and Artistry Essentials — innovating and iterating on existing core strengths

* sponsoring a brilliant set of outstanding athletes as world wide brand ambassadors, including 100 metre world record holder Asafa Powell who was ALREADY a Double X user and attributed his record setting edge to that product

* other behind-the-scenes developments including creating a new research and development team and hiring Glenn Armstrong, PhD, as the new VP Innovation to head up the group

Now they’ve gone one step further by hiring a new Executive VP and CFO (Chief Financial Officer) who is an alumnus of General Electric’s renown management development system, and Boeing Capital Corporation:

“May 21 /PRNewswire/ — Alticor Inc. today announced the appointment of Russell A. Evans as the company’s new executive vice president and chief financial officer. He joins the company from Boeing Capital Corporation, where he served as vice president and CFO.

Evans brings more than 28 years of experience to his new post. At Boeing Capital, Evans led a team of 80 people and supported the subsidiary’s core business of arranging financing to assist in the sale of products and services for other Boeing business units. As CFO, he oversaw Boeing Corporation’s $7 billion aircraft leasing business, which included evaluating airline financing proposals, cash management, portfolio risk management and all aspects of public financial reporting. He also served on key corporate teams, including the one that launched the company’s new 787 Dreamliner aircraft.

Before joining Boeing in 2004, Evans had worked for two decades at General Electric, where he held positions of escalating responsibility in the company’s financial operations. In his last GE post, Evans worked as chief operating officer of GE Service Management in the appliance division.

“We’re delighted that Russ will be joining our team at a critical time in Alticor’s global transformation,” said Steve Van Andel, chairman of Alticor. “He brings to us top-notch experience learned at two of the world’s most admired companies.”

Doug DeVos, Alticor’s president, added: “Russ will play a key role in assisting the company in achieving its goals of solid revenue growth and elevating our business capabilities to the next level.”

Evans said, “I’ve been extremely impressed with Alticor’s global reach, quality consumer products, leadership team, and their commitment to excellence. That, combined with a robust plan for growth, is a very compelling opportunity. I look forward to playing a role in bringing those plans to fruition.”

SPEAKING OF AMWAY, and in light of Chuck’s previous post related to brand management, how seriously are YOU taking Alticor’s Transformation Process, and what odds do you  give it for success? In what practical ways has the transformation motivated or changed what you are doing to build and succeed in your Quixtar/Amway Global business?

written by rdknyvr \\ tags: Accreditation, Alison Hague, Alticor, Amway, Artistry Essentials, Asafa Powell, Boeing, Doug DeVos, General Electric, Glenn Armstrong, Quixtar, Quixtar University, Russell Evans, Simply Nutrilite, Steve Lieberman, Steve Van Andel

“A brand name is more than a word.  It is the beginning of a conversation.” – LEXICON

“Brand equity is the sum of all the hearts and minds of every single person that comes into contact with your company.” – CHRISTOPHER BETZTER

“A brand that captures your mind gains behavior.  A brand that captures your heart gains commitment.” – SCOTT TALGO, Brand Strategist 

Quixtar and Amway Global are in the midst of a complete Business Transformation.  A focal point of that transformation is the move from the “Quixtar” brand name back to the Amway brand name as “Amway Global” (but don’t be surprised if it moves further to simply “Amway”).  I personally am pleased with the change, believing it to be in the best interests of the company and all IBOs long-term.  

Harry Beckwith is one of my favorite authors and marketing advisors.  A Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Stanford University, his book Selling the Invisible has been named one of the Ten Best business books of all time, with sales of over 675,000 copies in 14 languages.  He is also the author of The Invisible Touch, You, Inc., and What Clients Love.  In addition, Beckwith is a highly regarded speaker at national conventions of Fortune 200 companies as well as a regular contributor to CNN, the Wall Streeet Journal, Business Week, Entrepreneur and other periodicals.  He also advises and consults with some of the world’s most respected companies, both in the US and internationally, including Disney, 3M, Wells Fargo, Hewlett-Packard, Target, and DuPont.  Harry and his wife, Christine, are partners in their firm, Beckwith Partners (http://www.beckwithpartners.com/).   

I subscribe to Beckwith’s email newsletter “Invisible Ink:  Thoughts on marketing from Harry Beckwith” and found one of the short columns in his May 20th newsletter to be of particular interest.  Harry devoted a few minutes to discussing how well Apple is managing its brand in the marketplace.  I thought you might find his column of interest as well.  By the way, you can subscribe to Beckwith’s free email newsletter at http://www.harrybeckwith.com.      

LESSONS FROM FLYING APPLES

Item: April 23, 2008. Defying the economic tides, Apple today announced a $1.05 billion profit for the second quarter and a 45% increase in revenue over the same quarter a year ago, fueled partly by a 51% increase in unit sales of Macintosh computers.

We live in a world where technological improvements can be mimicked by a competitor in weeks, not the years it once required. In services, the final competitors for an account appear so similar on the surface that a prospect must dig beneath that to make a decision.

How do people choose?

They chose the brand, as Apple is demonstrating vividly.

You know “Apple” the minute you encounter it: its groundbreaking stores, its ads, its point of purchase, its packaging, its website. You hear iPhone, iMac, iTunes. You know them not just on sight, but even before, in your mind’s eye. You can picture them: simple, engaging, clean and wonderful to look at, easy to read - and use. Indeed, that expectation becomes a prophecy; an i-anything becomes what you believe it will be.

You sometimes know you are experiencing “Microsoft,” if they make their logo so large you can reach no other conclusion. But what would a Microsoft store look like? A Microsoft version of the iPod? A Microsoft phone?

Why are the these questions so hard to answer, when the same questions about Apple are so easy? Because Apple understands brand identity. Apple knows that, as the word suggests, an identity is something identifiable, and also identical every time; otherwise, it would not be an identity at all, but a collection of different masks, obscuring the company behind them.

There are colors that belong to Apple - and thousands that do not. Surfaces that belong to Apple (brushed silver) and dozens that do not. Sentiments that belong to Apple (”insanely great”) and those that do not (”a commitment to excellence”).

You even know what to expect from Apple’s instructions. They will appear to have been written by Hemingway: not one word more than necessary, just one true and painstakingly edited sentence after another.

Apple is managing its brand brilliantly. Every element sings in unison, a song without a weak note. The brands you trust most do that. They are predictably good at least and great at best, and their utter consistency reassures you:

I want what they have.

And in growing numbers, people want what Apple has. Out in the economic gloom you can see Macintoshes and iPhones flying, and Apple’s obsessive management of its brand deserves significant credit.

I think Amway and all IBOs would agree that we want the Amway brand to be just as identifiable in a consistent and positive way as Apple is in the public at large.  But how could we help bring that about?  How cold we manage the Amway brand better?

What are YOUR thoughts on how Alticor/Quixtar/Amway and IBOs worldwide could manage the Amway brand name better? 

written by Chuck Lia \\ tags: Amway, Amway Global, Apple, Beckwith Partners, Harry Beckwith, Quixtar

“Discourse, the sweeter banquet of the mind.” – HOMER, The Odyssey

“Good discourse sinks differences and seeks agreements.” – AMOS BRONSOM ALCOTT 

“The best of life is conversation.” – RALPH WALDO EMERSON

This is Part 2 and Point 1 in the series “How Blogging Could Serve the Mutual Interests of Amway Global, IBOs, and Tool Systems”. 

Point 1.  “Blogging is conversational.  This is the most important dynamic about blogging.  Blogging is a dialogue, not a monologue.  While many things in life are best done face-to-face, the realities of global business and relationships today make it virtually impossible to meet with everyone.  Until blogging came along it was near impossible for one person to converse with many people in multiple locations from any point where he or she had a computer and internet access.  But a communications revolution has been underway for several years that has changed all that, namely blogging, and it shows no signs of abating anytime soon.  Blogging is changing the way business is done, not only in North America, but around the world.  From Paris to Tokyo, from New York to Los Angeles, from London to Sydney, heck, from Bowden, North Dakota to Blakely, Georgia — the online conversation is changing.  Therefore, we all need to understand this blogging communications revolution better.”  [From the introductory May 13th post.] 

Is there any forum in our business where issues in the business are discussed in depth by everyone involved in the business?  Or has our business become so crassly polarized that we no longer have any forum that requires company and IBO leaders to publically address important issues in depth?

Today in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the local daily newspaper where I live, there was an article about former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn, a conservative Democrat, and his work to bring dialogue about substantive issues to the American population, dialogue that Nunn says is sorely lacking.  (Sound familiar?)  While I have no interest in getting into specific political issues here, some of Nunn’s thoughts about that dialogue lean directly against several of the issues that have been raised online by me and other bloggers on this site and others.  [For the record I am a 58 year old lifelong Republican who has been moving more toward the independent position over the past five or six years as my disgust with the polarization of the political debate has become more pronounced.  I have not yet decided who I will vote for in the upcoming election.]  

Nunn believes that middle America has been shut out of the political dialogue by political polarization for the past decade or so, and that has led to the rise of McCain and Obama, both of whom appeal to independents.  (In the same way I believe that rank and file IBOs have been shut out of substantive business dialogue by business politics and polarization.) 

Speaking of Obama, Nunn says,

“U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar (Republican - Ind.) tells me he (Obama) is genuine, he is sincere, he’s very capable and not only is he a fast learner, but he’s got real depth.  Even when he’s heading to the left, he always wants to find out what the other position is.  I think that is enormously important.  We’ve been heading down an ideological split in the country — it’s been annoying for a long time.  It’s gotten dangerous now.  Even though I would love for him to have more experience, I think he’s the most likely to listen, he’s the most likely to be non-ideological.  There are very few people in politics now who let the facts have a bearing on their conclusions.”  

Now keep in mind, Sen. Lugar is a conservative Republican who is the former Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and Nunn is a conservative Democrat well-known for his strong position on defense issues, so their comments about Obama (a liberal Democrat) are not what one would expect to hear.  [Also, please understand, I am not an Obama supporter, I am just trying to make a point.] 

My point is this, both Lugar and Nunn are open to dialogue on issues (and it appears, Obama is as well) even if, at first glance, the source of part of that dialogue may not be in line with their personally held beliefs or convictions.  In addition, it’s interesting to note that Nunn has been hosting a series of “dialogues” — available on the internet interestingly enough — on terrorism and national security with former Defense Secretary William Cohen.  (Sound familiar?)  Why is Nunn hosting these “dialogues?”  Nunn says its because America needs to regain a non-partisan approach to foreign policy and he believes the dialogues may help facilitate that approach. 

I agree with the underlying premise in Nunn’s comments and his reasons for the “dialogues.”  I also believe that Quixtar/Amway Global and their IBO leaders would be well served to participate in a non-polarized approach to discussing company issues – online dialogues would be a great start – and to do so in a way that includes everyone involved in the business, respects the opinions of everyone involved in the conversation, and is open to any topic IBOs want to raise (no matter how tenuous or difficult).  

That is what I have been trying to do here on the “Speaking of Amway” blog and that is what many other Amway related blog hosts are trying to do as well.   Yet many of those who should be most involved in the online discussion are nowhere to be found.  They engage in conversations in safe havens where they have complete control not only over the conversation, but also over the topics of that conversation as well — or not at all.  Any substantive discussion on real topics of interest in our business, particularly topics that might threaten their position, is avoided at all costs.  IBO and company leaders appear not to be interested in conversations on topics of real substance with mainline IBOs, just in ongoing daily drivel that has the appearance of important discussion.  I don’t mean to be rude but some of them strike me as little more than men without chests, lacking the intestinal fortitude to enter the debate.  IBO and tool system leaders, if they are so convinced their ideas and views are best for the business, should come into a forum or two like this and express their views and perspective clearly and then answer the questions bloggers raise about them.  They should put their views to the test in front of our entire business community, even those outside our community.  Their silence is deafening at times.  The same is true of company leaders.      

I can promise them that the conversation here will be more than respectable by blogging standards.  I do now and will continue to moderate the discussion to ensure reasonably respectable dialogue.  However, what I do not respect is the unwillingness of company and IBO leaders to enter the conversation in any meaningful way outside the confines of their little bubble, immune to any direct interaction with those who might challenge them.  We should all expect, if not demand, more from our IBO and company leaders than what they currently bring to the table in online forums.

The internet is about dialogue, not monologue.  And no place is that more true than in the blogosphere.  As Yossi Vardi put it, “Blogging is word of mouth on steroids.”  The simple fact is that the online community is not going away, so the sooner all parties in Quixtar/Amway Global get involved in the online conversation, the better.  I honestly believe it is in the best interests of everyone involved with the business to do so as quickly as possible. 

The “Stepford IBO” is a dying breed.  You know the one:  blue suit, white shirt, red tie; does what he or she is told; speaks only when spoken to; questions nothing; believes everything.  The internet has made him extinct and it would probably be best if everyone made peace with that reality.  And soon.

You know, to earn a lot of style points we could do a forward three and a half somersault with one twist off the three meter board, 3.7 degree of difficulty, but if we don’t enter the water cleanly — “openly, honestly, and transparently” as Steve Lieberman put it last week — it won’t help our score as much as we’d like.  One of the best ways to create a climate of openness, honesty, and transparency in Quixtar/Amway Global, so we can enter the water cleanly, is through online conversation.  However, that conversation must be open to anyone and everyone who wants to participate; kept honest by allowing everyone the freedom to respond to and challenge all posts and comments as long as they are respectful; and fully transparent regardless of the topic or the outcome of that conversation.  If that occurs I am absolutely convinced that Amway Global’s credibility and reputation will be enhanced in the short-term and greatly solidified over the long-term — to the enormous benefit of the company, its IBOs, and our customers.   

The conversation’s going.  We’re waiting to hear from you.  I hope you won’t keep us waiting too long.

Speaking of Amway, what are YOUR thoughts on how IBOs, IBO leaders, our customers, and the company itself could more effectively enter the online conversation?

written by Chuck Lia \\ tags: Amway Global, Barack Obama, blogging, Dialogue, Former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn, Quixtar, U.S. Senator Richard Lugar

“Regardless of the changes in technology, the market for well-crafted messages will always have an audience.” — STEVE BURNETT, The Burnett Group 

“One person with passion is better than forty people merely interested.” – E. M. FORSTER

Since the end of the TEAM debacle there has been a noticable quieting of much of the discord online regarding Quixtar and Amway Global.  TEAM has moved on to its next “big thing” and many of us in Quixtar/Amway Global are redirectly our efforts toward success in this “great thing.”  However, in the past decade the debate about our business online has been heated, highly so at times, and filled with multiple detractors with a passion for negativity that bordered on the absurd, if not the insane.  Unfortunately, during that same period there were few public defenders of the business, few people who were willing to stand in the breech so to speak and defend the business against all comers in multiple online venues.  

One of those defenders was, and still is, ibofightback, the highly respected host of “The Truth About Amway” site.  (www.thetruthaboutamway.com)  For years, against overwhelming odds, ibofightback continued to honestly and very intelligently defend the worldwide Amway business against its detractors — and I might add, in a highly effective manner as well.  Everyone in the business owes him a debt of gratitude for the role he played during this turbulent period.  While IBO leadership pondered and debated what to do about negative content on the web, ibofightback got on the web and joined the debate.  He went to work and invested his time and money building a great website to counteract and accurately represent the business against those who knowingly engaged in misrepresentations and half-truths.  Today he is seen by virtually everyone as a candid, thoughtful, and knowledgeable resource about the business.  If there were a test that all IBOs’ had to take to measure their overall knowledge of the many facets of our business, I would put my money on ibofightback.  Online, ibofightback is a combination news anchor, roving reporter, investigative journalist, commentator, historian, court clerk, wiki contributor, and economic forecaster – oh yes, and an IBO to boot. 

When I started this blog my goal was simply to try to engage the IBO community (including its leadership) and the company in theme oriented dialogue.  I wanted to see if we could work toward solutions to some of the challenges I perceived in the business.  I hoped that IBOs and IBO leaders would be willing to engage me on important issues, or tell me why they weren’t important, or why I was wrong about them.  My hope has been somewhat realized with IBOs, but unfortunately, not as much with IBO leaders.  I still hope that will change in the coming months.  I also hoped the company and some of its leaders would engage us here as well.  Thankfully, that has happened on a small scale and I hope that limited engagement today will blossom into something much bigger and trust-based in the coming years.  I honestly believe we would all benefit from the online exchange and dialogue. 

There are others on the web I have much respect for who have been integral to our blog discussions.  “Tex” and “rdknyvr” come immediately to mind.  While Tex knows I haven’t always been thrilled with his tone online (even though he has been much more “winsome” [private joke] of late, which I truly appreciate), I have always respected his intellect, his reasoning, and his passion for his beliefs.  On a personal level I like him a lot.  I wish more of you could see that side of him.  I’m sure you would like him as much as I do.  “rdknyvr” has become a great friend and virtually the co-moderator on this blog.  I never had a brother, but if I had one, I’d want him to be like rdknyvr.  We share similar values and mindsets about the business and its helpful to me to have someone to bounce my ideas off of before I post my thoughts in cyberspace.  I’m grateful to have ”met’ both Tex and rdknyvr in the blogosphere and hope our discussions continue for years.  Bridgett, DRO (my upline, BTW), and so many others have also been a real help in helping me formulate my thoughts for this blog.  In addition, so many others of you post comments and I enjoy them all.  Thanks to each of you.

However, nothing I am doing today would be worth a hoot if it weren’t for the soil that was tilled, nurtured, and cultivated by ibofightback.  He was the trailblazer.  Everything I am doing is directly owed to the trail he blazed before me and the groundwork he laid.  For that I am grateful.  I’m not aware if Quixtar, as an online company, has an award or honor for those who have gone the extra mile to support the company online.  I don’t think so.  But if they did, ibofightback should be its first recipient.

“ibofightback,” thanks for all you have done, are doing, and will do to promote the Amway business on the web.  We all appreciate you and we’re all grateful to you for your hard work on our behalf and that of the company as well.

written by Chuck Lia

You can download the pdf of Mr. Justice Norris’ well-written 69 page decision in the case of Amway v. BERR (UK) at www.amwaywiki.com . [On the home page, go to “Facts, Myths and Controversies” and click on “Controversies.” Under “Current” click on “BERR v Amway UK.” The pdf of the Final Judgement is at the bottom of the article under “Court Documents.”]

It is highly relevant to Chuck’s current series on transparency and change. If you have any comments to make, kindly make them NOT HERE, but just below in Chuck’s last post and in response to the questions he has already posed there.

I would just quickly note my view that Mr. Justice Norris has done Amway a huge service, not only in approving them to continue business in the UK under their revised business model, but by incisively discussing and dissecting the inadequacies of the past — both Amway UK and the Systems – thereby driving a legal stake in the ground which will be a benchmark for Amway Global around the world as well as all other direct sales companies — and for any other legal reviews of the business model. As Alticor said last May at the Amway Blog, “never again.” And one would also have to observe that the business landscape for Systems has also changed radically.

Comments below in Chuck’s post, please.

written by rdknyvr \\ tags: Amway, Amway v BERR, amwaywiki, BERR, business landscape, Mr. Justice Norris, Transparency, UK

“This good news [about the UK market]…sends a clear message about how we need to be operating in every market. The ruling emphasizes the importance of openness, honesty, and transparency in all we do. It reinforces how critical it is that we enforce our rules and demand high standards of ourselves and everyone who represents this business. And that’s what our business transformation here is all about.” — STEVE LIEBERMAN, Managing Director, Quixtar, posting on the Ada-tudes Blog, May 14, 2008

If we were trying to cast a vision of a truly open, honest, and transparent Amway Global on every level — company, IBOs, tool systems – how would we express that vision?  What would the business look like?  What would the business sound like?  How would it feel to the new prospect?  How would it be experienced by the new customer? 

As you can see in the above excerpt from Steve Lieberman’s recent blog post, the corporation says it is committed to those values.  Believing that to be true, if they were truly implemented, how might we notice it in the business?  And in light of those values, what would we want the business to sound and look like as a practical matter?  What do we mean when we say “open,” “honest,” and “transparent?”  Better still, what does Steve Lieberman (and indirectly Amway Global) mean when he (it) says those words?  Are our definitions and meanings congruent?  Or is there a disparity between us?

How “open” do we want to be?  How “honest?”  How ‘transparent?”  What are the parameters of our openness, honesty, and transparency?  Across the board — or only when it suits our corporate or tool system public relations goals?

I’m interested in your feedback.  But to get the conversation going, allow me to offer two relatively simple areas where I believe these values could be better expressed.

Currently once an IBO reaches a particular level in the business he is given the title that goes with his level — Sapphire, Emerald, Diamond, etc. — and they are apparently free to use that title permanently.  Yet there are dozens of those same IBOs who have not requalified at those levels for years, some for even more than a decade.  Some are nowhere near their former level.  However, they continue to be presented on stages around the world as being at those levels.  The most recent 2007 Achievers magazine showed that in some LOAs more than one-third of the IBO leadership promoted on the LOA’s website did not qualify as Q-12.  Some formerly qualified Emeralds and Diamonds are now little more than Platinums in their home market and have not broken a new Platinum leg in years.  Yet they continue to teach from stages about how to build the business, even though they have not built the business themselves in years — and have no experience in successfully building the business in the internet age.  Is allowing them to continue to hold their business title and to speak from stage today with the credibility that goes with that pin level “open, honest, and transparent?”  Or would it be more open, honest, and transparent to insist that all those who speak from stage should be introduced at their current actual level in the business, particularly in their home market?  

A second example.  Many of the issues that have created serious challenges for the company around the world have arisen because of less than robust monitoring by the company of business activities by IBOs and tool systems.  The most recent TEAM and UK situations come immediately to mind.  This past year the company announced it is going to work more closely with LOAs and their Platinums.  Q/AG Sales Advisors will be out in the field interacting on a regular basis with Platinums and above to develop a more partnership-like relationship.  This is a terrific step — but it has one weakness.  While the company said it would be working more closely with the field, it also said it would not be looking over anyone’s shoulder, it would let the Platinums know in advance when they were coming into town.  

Now I have been outside a meeting and personally heard an Emerald say “the company wants us to say….., but I am not willing to say that.”  Several times I’ve been at a Business Overview presentation and said to myself halfway through, “If someone from Quixtar Rules saw this business overview they would have a complete meltdown.”  I assure you, however, that if that same Emerald or Overview presenter thought there was a possibility that someone from Q/AG or the Rules Dept. might be around or in the audience it would have been a much different overview — and likely much more in line with the company’s rules and guidelines.  

As Ronald Reagan said, “Trust, but verify.”  We don’t need an atmosphere of Big Brother in the business, but we don’t need an atmosphere of laissez-faire either.  The last decade of nonsense on many fronts should have made that clear to everyone.  Having the Sales Advisor announce in advance everytime he or she is coming into town is akin to Major League Baseball telling a major league baseball player exactly when his next five “random” drug tests are scheduled for the next year.  That’s complete foolishness.  It is no less foolish in Q/AG.  There needs to be more balance in the process if Q/AG is going to have the kind of honesty, openness, and transparency in the business it says it desires.

In Steve Lieberman’s excerpt I quoted above he stated that the UK ruling “reinforces how critical it is that we enforce our rules and demand high standards of ourselves and everyone who represents this business.”  I agree.  However, I’d add that a critical aspect of that process is Q/AG being more proactively aware of what is going on in the field, not in a heavy-handed manner, but from a mindset that says ”this is important for the well-being, stability, and profitability of the company’s business long-term — and yours as well.”  Everyone would benefit from a reasonable accountability process that encouraged honesty and transparency in the marketplace.

What are YOUR thoughts on how we could cast a vision for openness, honesty, and transparency in Amway Global?

written by Chuck Lia \\ tags: Amway Global, honesty, openness, Steve Lieberman, Transparency

Three weeks ago I told you about Michael “Anthony” Keogh, the 15 year old oldest son of one of my best friends and tennis buddies, Mike Keogh, and his wife, Ann-marie.  Three weeks ago Anthony was suddenly diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia, a very serious and aggressive cancer that is quite rare in children under 18.  Fortunately it appeared that it was discovered relatively early so the prognosis was guarded and everyone was hopeful that our prayers for a full recovery would be answered.  Anthony went through a chemo series for about nine days and then spent the past couple of weeks trying to recover from such a severe assault against his body.  A couple of weeks ago both of Anthony’s younger brothers, Nicholas and Dominic, were tested for their compatibility with Anthony if a bone marrow transplant was required, which it turned out is the case. 

Well, praises of praises, we learned Tuesday that Dominic is a perfect match for Anthony — an 8 out of 8 perfect match!  In the recent past they only used 6 markers for bone marrow matches, but now they go even further, and Dominic is a perfect 8 for 8 match, which increases the odds of success dramatically.  Obviously, everyone is thrilled and grateful.  Anthony will now undergo two more chemo series in June and July at Childrens’ Hospital Scottish Rite in Atlanta, Georgia and then the bone marrow transplant will go forward in late July at Emory University Hospital in Decatur, Georgia (just east of Atlanta), where they have a specialty transplant center.  

I will update you further on Anthony’s progress as we continue to move forward.  For more information, you can visit here:

http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/anthonykeogh 

written by Chuck Lia \\ tags: Anthony Keogh, Mike Keogh

“…authenticity is the core value that makes blogging such a new and different way for businesses to communicate.  If authenticity is the defining feature of blogging, then credility is its benefit.” — RICHARD SCOBLE and SHEL ISRAEL, authors of Naked Conversations:  How Blogs are Changing the Way Businesses Talk with Customers 

“Now, the Web is enabling the market to converse again, as people tell one another the truth about products and companies and their own desires.” – The Cluetrain Manifesto

“Good marketing is partly a matter of following the rules.  Great marketing often happens by breaking the rules.” – PHILIP KOTLER

(Part 1 of a series)

Is it possible that blogging could serve the mutual interests of everyone associated with Amway Global – the company itself, Independent Business Owners at all levels, and the tool support systems?  I am absolutely convinced it could if all parties approached it correctly. 

Over the next couple of weeks in multiple posts I am going to share with you the reasons why I believe this is true.  In addition, I am going to encourage you to share with our online community why you may agree or disagree with my views.  Who knows, it’s quite possible you might have an entirely different perspective on things, an insight or two that I or others may not have thought of.  If so, please share your insight(s) and the reasons for your point of view.  The online community wants to hear from you.

Below are my seven reasons why I believe blogging could serve the mutual interests of Amway Global, IBOs at all levels, and the Tool Systems.  Over the next couple of weeks I intend to unpack each of my seven reasons more fully for you.  Here they are: 

1.  Blogging is conversational.  This is the most important dynamic about blogging.  Blogging is a dialogue, not a monologue.  While many things in life are best done face-to-face, the realities of global business and relationships today make it virtually impossible to meet with everyone.  Until blogging came along it was near impossible for one person to converse with many people in multiple locations from any point where he or she had a computer and internet access.  But a communications revolution has been underway for several years that has changed all that, namely blogging, and it shows no signs of abating anytime soon.  Blogging is changing the way business is done, not only in North America, but around the world.  From Paris to Tokyo, from New York to Los Angeles, from London to Sydney, heck, from Bowden, North Dakota to Blakely, Georgia — the online conversation is changing.  Therefore, we all need to understand this blogging communications revolution better.

2.  Blogging builds credibility and trust – and most companies understand the value of trust.  This is a fundamental reason why businesses need to join the online conversation.  Nowhere can businesses create credibility and trust more easily, effectively, or inexpensively than online through blogs — but only if they go about it the right way.  The old way of “command and control” no longer works very effectively.  Trying to manipulate or control the conversation, or trying to restrict who can access or participate in the conversation, is the online version of a horse and buggy — far out of date and even further out of touch with reality.  It is the approach of fools.   

3.  Blogging brings a human aspect to companies.  Blogs show the public (and the customer) what kind of people are behind the desk at a company.   They also show the public (and the prospect) what kind of people partner with a company to build its business, in our case, IBOs at all levels of the business.  Blogs bring real people to the conversation about a business or company, not actors pretending to be real people.  Having world class athletes as corporate spokespersons is good pubic relations, but as every recent study of consumer trust and corporate credibility has shown, corporate spokespersons like them are seen in the marketplace as little more than hired guns with very limited credibility about the business itself.

4.  Blogging is the best communication vehicle available to handle negative online content.  “Say what!,” you say?  Yes, you heard me right, blogs are the best place to handle negative online content.  If people are already saying negative things about our business and they have multiple places to say them, wouldn’t we rather they say them on our forums and our blogs?  Wouldn’t we rather they say them where we can address their comments head-on in a sensitive manner?  Wouldn’t we rather they express them where they can gain a better understanding of the values of our company, its humanness, and its desire for excellence?

5.  Blogging moves information faster than any other communication medium.  Blogging is the poster child for “business at the speed of light.”  Anyone who remotely kept track of the 2004 American presidential race knows how fast information was created and moved around in the blogosphere about the candidates and their pasts.  It was mind boggling.  As one online blogger said, “Blogging is just word of mouth on steroids.”  Need I say more?  Well, not today, but I will in the next couple of weeks.

6.  Blogging often engenders greater accountability and transparency.  A recent article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution about the insurance giant Aflac spoke volumes about the value of accountability and transparency in developing credibility and trust with investors.  More public companies would do well to emulate Aflac’s approach.  In addition, numerous examples abound on the internet about companies who decided to become as forthcoming as possible online as a result of challenges created when the blogging community took those companies to task for corporate failures and errors in judgement.  In some cases, issues were brought to light that had not been made public by the companies themselves.  The blogging community itself raised the issues and then gave the companies no place to hide from them.  At the end of the day virtually all of the companies believed they had gained valuable insights from the process of change initiated by having the issues raised online, to the mutual benefit of the company, its clients, and the marketplace. 

7.  Blogging brings new perspectives, challenging questions, and fresh ideas to a business.   Often these new perspectives, questions, and ideas have not been considered by, nor were they even on the radar of, the companies themselves.  One example I will discuss at length, French cosmetic giant L’Oreal, shows the tremendous benefits a company can gain from opening itself up to really hearing from its customers.  Beth Dornan’s recent blog post on the Inside Quixtar blog (http://insidequixtar.opportunityzone.com/2008/05/12/Name-this-space.aspx) asking IBOs to submit recommendations for a new name for her blog as a result of the move to Amway Global, is a simple, but excellent example of this approach.

As you are likely aware, Google is the most influential of all online companies and has the most influence on the rankings of virtually every other company.  A high rank on Google is far more valuable than having five PR firms cranking out press releases.  In fact, a strong argument could be made that it is more valuable than being on the cover of Newsweek.  The point has tipped and the sea change has already occurred as far as blogging is concerned.  As Richard Scoble and Shel Israel declared in their book Naked Conversations, “The genie is indeed out of the bottle, but history indicates some companies will persist in ignoring it.”

So, is blogging something we can ignore?  I highly doubt it, at least not if we want to be part of the 21st century.  Is blogging something we can take lightly?  Again, I highly doubt it.  I believe the best approach to blogging is to embrace it energetically — but also intelligently and wisely.  That is what I want to talk about over the next two or three weeks — how an energetic, yet intelligent and wise, approach to blogging and the internet could increasingly serve the mutual interests of Amway Global, all IBOs, and the tool systems; and be a strong catalyst for robust momentum during this Business Transformation.

Speaking of Amway, what are YOUR thoughts on how blogging could serve the mutual interests of Amway Global, IBOs, and tool systems? 

written by Chuck Lia \\ tags: Amway Global, Beth Dornan, blogging, credibility, Inside Quixtar, Transparency

For those interested in staying current on happenings at IL Genetics and Gensona…  THIS WEDNESDAY, MAY 14:

Interleukin Genetics Announces Conference Call and Webcast to Discuss First Quarter 2008 Business Results

WALTHAM, MA – May 7, 2008 – Interleukin Genetics, Inc. (AMEX: ILI), announced today that it will host a conference call and webcast on Wednesday, May 14, 2008 at 4:30 p.m. ET [1:30 p.m. Pacific Time Zone] to review the Company’s first quarter 2008 financial results and provide an update on recent corporate developments.
 
To access the live call, dial 877-627-6555 (domestic) or 719-325-4869 (international). The live webcast will be available on the Investors section of the Company’s website, www.ilgenetics.com.

Replay access of the teleconference will be available for one week following the call by dialing 888-203-1112 (domestic) or 719-457-0820 (international). The passcode for the replay is 4243283. The webcast will be archived following the call at www.ilgenetics.com. 

About Interleukin Genetics
Interleukin Genetics, Inc. (AMEX: ILI) is a genetics-focused personalized health company that develops preventive consumer products and genetic tests for sale to the emerging personalized health market.

written by rdknyvr \\ tags: genetic tests, Gensona, Interleukin Genetics, nutrigenomics, Nutrilite, Personalized Health