Reaffirming DSA’s Mission
I’ve mentioned several times that my goals on DirectSelling411.com include correcting misinformation about direct selling while also providing a forum for discussing topics relevant to direct selling.
One thing I didn’t fully anticipate was that people would have questions about DSA’s mission. Several people have asked, “How can DSA represent the direct selling industry and work to protect the sales consultants and consumers involved?”
It’s a legitimate question, one that DSA President Neil Offen addressed during his Annual Meeting Speech last week in Phoenix. He explained that these twin goals are really two sides of the same coin, but I’ll let Neil speak for himself:
“Of course we have a duty to our dues-paying members to protect and promote their interests, but one of the most important ways we fulfill that part of our mission is through a commitment to consumer protection. By holding ourselves to a higher standard, by policing our own actions through a system of self-regulation that goes above and beyond the requirements of the law, we do more to promote and protect ourselves than is possible through any other method.”
In other words, we achieve one goal by achieving the other. Happy, satisfied customers who understand and exercise their rights as consumers represent the best kind of success for DSA and every member company. We never rest on our laurels, and Neil shared his thoughts on where we plan to focus our efforts in the coming year and beyond:
“We must continue to do more to enforce our own rules and always act in the best interests of our sellers and their customers. Throughout the course of this meeting, we have heard about Corporate Social Responsibility. But it means more than “doing well by doing good.” It means operating using only the highest standards in business ethics by every measure of the term. The tenets of the (DSA) Code (of Ethics) outline this behavior, but consumers and distributors will ultimately define acceptable marketplace standards. Today’s consumers and distributors are empowered and they speak loud and clear – we must listen and act accordingly. Companies and industries that do not meet consumer expectations will be left by the roadside.”
Neil, who reinforced the Association’s ongoing review and enhancement of the Code of Ethics, closed his remarks by reminding attendees that when it comes to DSA’s mission they must think about the long term:
“We have made great strides this past year, but the road before us is long and winding. We are in it for the long-haul and we shall not retreat from [our members’] mandate to always do what is right, to choose the high road when faced with a fork and to always have DSA act in the public interest…for that is in the interest of our companies and its millions of salespersons who rely on us.”
Neil’s remarks accurately reflect the importance of representing member companies, independent sellers and consumers – the concepts really are inseparable and I look forward to continuing to comment on this site about our efforts.
Tags: consumer protection, direct selling, DSA, MLM
June 21st, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Amy,
With all due respect to the direction of the speech, I commend one statement which needs made once promised. The bad players should immediately be banished from membership in good standing. Dues should be refunded and the DSA cleansed of the “business cult”. A pernicious cult which does real harm to real people. Let’s lay the question right on DSA table.
June 22nd, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Q-
I know how you would define “bad players,” but there’s a thing called due process. The DSA Code of Ethics outlines this in detail. If someone feels a company has violated the Code, they are invited to submit a complaint. If the violation is confirmed by the Independent Code Administrator, the company must either make it right, or be subject to penalties up to and including being expelled from membership. The great thing about the Code is companies proactively follow its tenets every day. And, if a problem occurs, they are more than happy to resolve it. Now, given your bias, I can imagine this process won’t be acceptable to you, but it does its job - most problems are avoided and those that do occur have a clear path to resolution. As always, DSA maintains its open invitation for anyone who has encountered a problem with a DSA member company to file a Code complaint.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:20 pm
There was another comment submitted, which I declined to post because it really dealt specifically with one particular company. However, the underlying sentiment was one I think is relevant to this chain. The poster asks how DSA can enforce its rules at the same time it is representing its members. I sent a personal reply to the poster, but thought my response would be a helpful addition to this chain as well. It follows:
“You know I have approved most of your messages for posting, even many of the ones that teeter on the brink of violating the blog rule concerning discussion of specific companies. I think I have demonstrated my willingness to post a variety of opinions, including ones with which I do not necessarily agree.
However, your recent submission is one that I will have to decline to post because it is clearly directed at a single company. I respect that you have had some experiences that have irreparably tarnished your view of that particular company. It is unfortunate that situation has also tarnished your view of the entire industry and an organization that, yes, supports the companies, but does so through helping them to follow a respectable path. Perhaps in your eyes DSA has become a scape-goat for the things you take issue with, and that is unfortunate because in reality we, along with our members, are working to address many of the very topics you have raised. However, the things you see as black and white based on your own personal experience are not necessarily as black and white in the larger picture. Your specific experience is an important part of the larger picture, as are the experiences of many others, many of which are far different from yours. While I’m not asking you to give up your opinions or even your skepticism, I am asking you to recognize that the discussion on my blog will not come to a conclusion overnight. I talked about due process in my last post - as I’m sure you can appreciate, we can’t take drastic action because “John Doe says there’s a problem.” But follow the process that has been put in place so we can identify and address both specific and larger issues that may exist - and maybe even find that some things identified as “issues” are not actually issues at all. The door for a constructive dialogue is open. I hope you and others will step through it instead of slamming it shut.”
I think this is a really important topic because it may be unclear to the casual observer how DSA serves its members and the public at the same time. For DSA to serve as a successful steward for everyone involved with direct selling, the ways in which we fulfill our mission must be made clear, and I for one don’t mind repeating them.
June 24th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Amy…
Of course I am the person’s whose comments you declined to post. I am not disparaging the DSA’s goal to present the industry in the best light possible. I am not down on direct selling and many of the more reputable companies that have been doing it right.
My Dad has always said that no matter how good you are, you are going to be judged by the friends you keep. If I associated with con men, then wouldn’t people have the right to believe that I might be a con man myself?
Amy, you extol all the good things about direct selling. No problem there. Any company that promotes something other than selling or who operates an endless chain of recruitment doesn’t deserve the good graces of the DSA even if these good graces are by association only. If there are rotten eggs in the DSA basket, should all the direct selling companies have to hold their nose?
I appreciate your forum. I don’t feel that we disagree on all the good things, but it is only the inclusion of obvious recruitment schemes and scams into the DSA that bothers me. If they were all wonderful direct sellers I would have little criticism. The over selling of dreams and recruitment of buyers (not sellers) is what separates legitimate direct selling companies from never ending recruitment schemes.
Informed consumers and potential distributors are important. I don’t ask people to only adhere to my viewpoint, but to use the good common sense I know they have.
Direct Selling could be a good industry if it didn’t have to be associated with folk determined to sell a phony dream and extract their own distributor’s money.
Amy, I have a few questions for the discussion: Shouldn’t there be minimum “selling” standard a company should live up to before being considered a direct selling company? Should a company that sells less than 4% of its products to non-distributors be called a direct selling company? Should distributors that go on an endless recruitment drive be considered direct sellers even if the only selling they do is to themselves? A line should be drawn here. No selling, no membership in the DSA. Shouldn’t the showing of luxury mansions, autos, vacations, yachts and personal aircraft be completely forbidden during recruitment presentations? Something stinks about any company that foster their distributors to believe that these nearly impossible dreams are possible. Possible maybe, probable, not likely. hmmm? Where do I sign up? Notice that I haven’t mentioned any company by name.
June 28th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Q - if someone who signed up as “a distributor” just to buy products cheaper, or who signed up to make money, then decided they didn’t want to put in the effort, but still wanted to buy the products, why wouldn’t you consider them “customers”? Some companies actively do, correctly my view, officially recategorize these people as customers. What’s your thoughts on this approach?
On another note, if you read Q’s site, he apparently hasn’t actually got much in the way of direct experience with any company. He’s upset with some relatives who apparently do, and funnily enough are happy with their experience.
A strange situation - the people actually involved seem content with their involvement, and folk not involved are complaining about it!
June 29th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
ibofightback…
I believe I’ve already said that from any company’s point of view, having distributors who actually are the customers is a good thing (at least for the company). What is good for one party may not always be good for the other. From your position, some companies may actually operate more like a buying club then?
Yes, ibofb, I do have some family involved. Their life has been incredibly negatively affected by their activities. Their children have basically became orphans in their own home. (Do they have a voice?) Family and friends have been alienated, and successful careers are being scorned as being “jackass of the boss” and “just over broke” failures. If their MLM pursuits didn’t negatively affect so many other people that love them, I wouldn’t take such a critical stance. I also am affected by their dream chasing activities that go way beyond what a simple direct selling business should.
I have said before, and I’ll say it again: Everyone has a right to be involved with MLM scam business if they so desire. If someone wants to do it, then go for it! Everyone has the right to be suckered and have their lives affected in so many other negative ways if they want to. In the end, they will have to suffer the consequences, whether good or bad.
So what if the children never see their parents; that grandparents have to raise the grand children; that good paying jobs and careers are derided as bad; that it is easier to change churches than to put up with everyone alienated by annoying invites; that thousands of dollars are spent supporting a business and buying tools that offer little in return; that lifelong friends say goodbye; and immediate family long for the good old days before the “business” came into their loved ones lives.
I admit that I at one time became a distributor in a MLM business which indeed was shut down by the Federal Courts. What is your point? Does one have to be a victim to describe the process? One doesn’t have to have a disease to understand how bad it can be for those that do? Indeed, there are the many former distributors that have been there and done that which are now reporting how their lives were adversely affected. Should their experiences count for nothing? Why should they lie, and can they all be lying?
I believe that “direct selling” is a good subject, one that opens up an avenue for Amy and you to make good points about the industry. There are positives to be found and I admit that I’ve had direct selling products in my home purchased at home parties.
Home sales parties and high pressure recruitment meetings (which generally offer a dream of MLM success as the main product) seem to be worlds apart to me. Distributor and customer seem to be interchangeable concepts in recruitment first strategies. I believe that the dream is oversold and mostly unachievable by even the most dedicated recruits. Early adopters (usually called kingpins) and the company selling the products are heavily favored in this confusing game of numbers.
Now, to your last point: “A strange situation?” There are indeed more people in the family complaining about “the business” than the daughter and son in law that are actually in it, you can be assured of that! Let’s start with the entire immediate family and then go to the entire extended family who’ve been exposed to the recruitment spiel at one time or another in the last three years. Children that complain are shown pictures of mansions, luxury autos, and beautiful swimming pools.
July 1st, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Q - There’s always at least two sides to every story and I’m sure you’ll agree that your IBO family members would tell a different story to yours.
Personally I find most people spend an awful lot more time away from their children with jobs than they do building a business on the side. Sure, initially it adds up, but after time when it gets to a reasonable level one or more parent can leave there full-time work.
Having said that, people need to make time for their family and be there when they’re there. My mentors have always taught to block out “family time” in my calendar before booking in any “business time”. There’s nothing inherent in direct sales or MLM that says you should ignore the family. I also vehemently disagree with things like folk being “scorned as being “jackass of the boss” and “just over broke” failures”.
That does nothing for the reputation of our business or industry and is completely contrary to anything I’ve been taught, and is contrary to the teachings of the company founders.
From what you have said I’m 90% certain I can correctly identify which group your family has become involved with. They are but one relatively small part of the Quixtar world and an even smaller part of the MLM and direct sales world. Don’t make the mistake of generalizing from a small part to the whole. The tail of an elephant looks nothing like an elephant.
July 1st, 2008 at 10:53 pm
ibofightback…
I’m sure Amy appreciates our discussion. Surely it has got to help her page load stats. Maybe you are right. I am like the blind man feeling the elephant. I guess I am the poor fellow who has to describe the area right under the tail. Smile.
I kinda sorta agree with you about certain “tape speak” ideas as being contrary to the ideas of the founders. I’ve expressed a high regard for Rich and Jay, and I just have to believe they are like the old commercial where the American Indian has a tear in his eye when he sees what has become of his beloved country. Of course Mr. Van Andel is gone and Rich expressed his views in his Directly Speaking II tapes.
Seems like efforts are being made to reign in some of the motivational organization excesses (which is good). Something needs to be done, and at least it would seem that something is being done. I believe that the founders have regretted allowing the kingpin early adopters to take complete control of the motivation business and giving their company the many black eyes that it now must wear.
I hardly think that the J.O.B. classics are going away anytime soon. Making IBOs “jackasses of the boss” and “just over broke” is way to much fun to just leave out of the recruitment spiel. Mr Steadson, are you telling me that there actually exists distributors who have not heard these phrases before? Come on?
Would the WWDB be your guess? You win first prize. I suppose you can say that you come from a different world. You are an Aussie aren’t you? G’day Mate.