Market Share or Profit? Yes!

It is a well-known fact that top managers are often faced with the dilemma between sacrificing long-term objectives in favor of short-term ones or the other way around. Things are not all that different when it comes to politics. The best measures are often similar to medicine: They have a bitter taste. What would you do, dear reader?

Would you choose to develop the business or obtain immediate profit? Or are you, like many Romanian entrepreneurs, in such a state that survival (by any means) is your only objective? There is one company, however, that is almost implausibly reporting rising turnovers, rising profits, rising volumes and rising numbers of customers. For four and a half years, every quarter, the company in question published results that were invariably higher than the previous ones — all in spite of the most severe economic and financial crisis since 1929.

That company is Apple. A new “Apple Event” took place on Oct. 20, and Steve Jobs unveiled the company’s latest achievements before the audience. This time, the highlight was the new Macbook Air model. The event started with a presentation of the Apple dynamics in terms of turnover, market share and, most importantly, customer satisfaction levels. What is the secret of Apple’s success? How can this company defy the crisis and keep selling more although everyone thinks that their products are more expensive than their competitors’? The answer lies in the ranking that the company led by Steve Jobs achieves in terms of customer satisfaction.

Apple has been number one, the absolute leader, for years. The secret of holding this privileged position in the hearts and minds of customers is not technological innovation but the fact that the company uses existing technologies for the immediate and full benefit of its customers. Apple products work well and are nice and easy to use. None of the products offered by the parents of the “bitten apple” is a technological peak. They simply manage to provide the most enjoyable user experience. This does not come for free, however, but at a price that is quite steep.

Is there something we could learn from Apple? Perhaps that putting the customer’s needs first is not a question of image but a question of revenue. Having many satisfied customers is not just a good superficial reason to hold press conferences and nag feisty journalists. It is a company’s very reason for being. If we translated this principle into the sphere of politics, parties would have no reason to complain that the press is treating them badly. Good governance would simply offer an increasing number of people reasons to be content. And content people would vote for continuity. And they would be as disciplined as Apple customers, who are eagerly waiting in line in order to spend an obscene amount of money on products no one really needs.