Open to Interpretation?
It’s okay to change your mind, but it should probably be less often than you change your underwear.
I’m not a fan of Mike Arrington over at Tech Crunch. For those of you who don’t have time to waste on the drama of tech blogs, he’s usually the guy at the center of that vortex, stirring the pot between Google hating Facebook, Tech lawsuits, patent claims, Twitter beat downs, and Apple hating …well, anyone who doesn’t worship their products or the man in the turtleneck.
Arrington writes whatever he thinks will get the most attention in the second that he pushes the post button. He’s the reason when faced with the choice between subscribing to Mashable or TechCrunch on my new Kindle, Mashable gets my $2.99 a month.
Arrington lacks credibility. His views are based on nothing more concrete than which way the wind blows. I’ve seen the man flip flop on the same issue/discussion at least three times in the same day. That kind of inconsistency makes me wonder how many voices his head houses on an hourly basis.
I’d wager a bet that sometimes your residents think that about their onsite management teams too. As a renter, I even run in to this issue with the management team where I live from time to time. When I call with a question, the answer I get can often depend greatly on who answers the phone or what time of the day I call, even if I’m calling about something as simple as a community policy.
How is it that we have policies that we don’t enforce equally, at all, or that we don’t all agree on the interpretation of? First of all, if we aren’t enforcing them equally to all residents, regardless of who answers the phone, then we can run into Fair Housing Hell really quickly.On top of which, we’re failing to present a unified front to our residents. It’s similar to a situation that any of you who were ever teenagers can relate to – if one parent is more likely to always give in then that’s the one who you always go to for questionable things like staying out past curfew…or waiving late fees.
Policy should be common sense and should be pretty firm. It should have the best interests of the customer relationship with the company in mind. It shouldn’t be so convoluted that you need a supreme court justice to interpret it. When this happens, then people quote things wrong – like pet policies, fees, rules – and you’re left cleaning up a mess that could have been headed off by simple clear communication.
If you’re not all on the same page, then your residents pick up on the inconsistency, and they will either exploit it or become frustrated by it. Either way, it’s uncomfortable for people on both ends when it looks like our policies change hourly.