It all – or almost all – started with the telegraph: SOS, an alleged acronym for Save Our Souls.
Why not our bodies, first? It can be argued.
Then came the Radio and the – obviously unfortunate – “MayDay” screams.
Nowadays, we are “on-line” most of the time; but, with some exception, it’s not us who write the “help!” message on a leaf, may be with our own blood, put it a bottle that came to us from the sinking ship, and trust the Ocean’s waves to take it to a right destination.
No.
If it were for some Companies, not all the glass in the World would be sufficient to produce the bottles they would use to send their “SOB” message: that is, “Save Our Budget”.
But technology came up with other kinds of “bottles”, that is, radio, placards, television, and now the Internet. What will come next, we have just to imagine.
I am not totally against this kind of information, or communication but, as it may happen to some of you, too, one feels flooded, and starts to resist it. When at home we record any kind of show, news or movie, we jump away the ads; and even when we watch news, we do the same: the overture tells what the symphony will be, which is very often the same old music.
I am pretty sure that most Companies advertising their products or themselves do not assess how profitable their expenditures are. And I am even more sure that they don’t assess the risks connected with excessive communication.
When we are with a loquacious person, don’t we simply stop listening and think of our own thoughts, instead?
Now, without being a Freud or similar “psychos”, there must be some good reasons why loquacity is what it is: an excessive / obsessive behavior.
Who of us are patient and courteous enough, and strong enough, too, allow the words-flood pass by; may be hinting the other that, just the same a big book is a big evil, a long monologue is not communication.
Effective Information and Communication are made of “give’s and take’s”: modern theater actors make the Audience participate.
While ISO Standards emphasize the importance of effective communication with and information to Customers, I honestly admit, and regret, that – in my own 20 years auditor’s career – I can only count on the fingers of my hand the audits in which I assessed the quality of information given to the Auditees’ Customers. And when I found some evident flaws, the excuses I usually got were like “we have always done that way” or “we copy what our competitors do”.
Now, in a world where Competition grow more and more fierce, and Consumers’ Associations more and more aggressive, Companies should be much more careful in luring Buyers with lark-mirrors, or un-keepable promises.
Like Companies, Lawyers have to meet their budgets, too; and when Lawyers see opportunities, well, it’s better to be well armed against them.
The micro-wave exploded cat case made – or was made to – a big fuss.
But since there’s no limit to human stupidity and greed for money, a clever Company should at least do its best not necessarily to detect and prevent ALL the risks connected with its product or service, but certainly the most probable ones.
And, in spite of those who believe that Probability Laws have not changed since Laplace’s time, there is all evidence that what has not happened until yesterday, happens today, therefore it may happen again tomorrow.