Pamela Spencer Case
The issued being argued is weather the customer is always right. In this case we see how a home improvement store must deal with an unhappy customer who is extremely dissatisfied with the installation of a fence supplied and installed by the store. The customer wants the store to replace the fence. However, if the store does replace the fence, it’s in danger of achieving profitability for the quarter. This in return prevents the employees to miss their bonuses.
The actions Pamela can take to make the customer happy is replacing the fence, however, one of the reasons Pamela took the position of Assistant Manager in House Mart was to take the challenge of turning the store into a profitable asset for the company. She was devoted to the goal as she had many people she felt were unnecessary laid off and made great amount of changes. Replacing the fence would simply tear down all the hard work she had put into the
Overall, businesses market themselves to make consumers believe that they are always rights; however, a business main priority is to make money. My recommendation to Pamela would be to check out the fence herself, analyze the fence to determine the cost of the damage. Thereafter, if the damage is severe enough that it would risk profitability for the quarter, my suggestion is to compensate Mrs. Kerns for a future purchase. In return, Mrs. Kerns will be paid for the damages but she will also come back into the store for a future purchase as Mrs. Kerns requested for something to be done not necessarily to replace the fence. In addition, Mrs. Kerns fought to buy the fence on sale, there is only so much that the store can do to please a customer.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document