4 ms·

When profitability, not customers, is your focus… then of course they did.

by ssss11 3y ago

ramenmeal 3y ago
A good indicator a monopoly is at play.
- throwawaymaths 3y ago
  Not really. Senior ux dev at <insert crate and barrel like company> told me that they A/B tested a more efficient flow and found conversion to sale dropped. Turns out when people have to put up with more hassle to buy something they get more committed, especially for high ticket items
  - cratermoon 3y ago
    That’s not at all the kind of enshittification Amazon was doing.
    - throwawaymaths 3y ago
      It's not too far off
      - cratermoon 3y ago
        How is changing up site UX at all the same as changing the content but staying with the same UX?
bogomipz 3y ago
Which is in interesting because Amazon's "Leadership Principles" a are well-known and well-publicized part of Amazon's culture. Number 1 on that list is of course "Customer Obsession", which states: >"Customer Obsession: Leaders start with the customer and work backwards. They work vigorously to earn and keep customer trust. Although leaders pay attention to competitors, they obsess over customers."[1] It's probably no surprise that this is little more than a meme whose sole purpose is to be ceremonially regurgitated during job interviews. [1] https://www.amazon.jobs/content/en/our-workplace/leadership-principles https://www.amazon.jobs/content/en/our-workplace/leadership-...
- MrRolleyes 3y ago
  [dead]
- azzthrooww 3y ago
  It really isn't a meme. It's taken pretty seriously at the company, often gets cited in meetings as a reason to do (or not do) something, and is almost always referenced in large strategic projects/planning docs. It's even sometimes included in criteria for determining performance/promotions. The problem lies in the fact that there's no one single definition of who "the customer" is, and no one single definition of what the best thing for that customer is. One team might see customer obsession as making sure only the best ads are shown, but there's probably another team who thinks that being obsessed about customers means showing the _most_ ads, while a third team sees _the ad companies_ as "the customer" and thinks that being customer obsessed means making them as happy as possible. There's a weird side effect about being so serious about customer obsession. Like I mentioned earlier, it's often used as a promotion criteria, so people will come up with weird stuff and then spin it as "customer obsessed" so they can get promoted, even if it's something like showing more ads or constantly reminding people to buy something (which probably gets spun as "helping the customer to not miss out on a good deal" or something like that).
  - bogomipz 3y ago
    >"The problem lies in the fact that there's no one single definition of who "the customer" is ..." From the post that we are commenting on here: >"... show that company executives, including former CEO Jeff Bezos, knowingly made changes to the e-commerce platform that boosted profits while harming consumers and sellers, and making the site less usable." It's pretty clear who the customer were here. It's literally all the parties that were not Amazon. Something that "gets cited in meetings" yet not applied in practice pretty much supports it being little more than meme status.
    - azzthrooww 3y ago
      Your quote listed two different distinct groups of people that are both customers of Amazon: consumers and sellers. And there's a third group that isn't listed: the ad companies which are also customers of Amazon. And what's best for one of those groups isn't necessarily what is best for the other group. So no, it's not very clear.

When profitability, not customers, is your focus… then of course they did.

by ssss11 3y ago

When profitability, not customers, is your focus… then of course they did.

ramenmeal 3y ago

A good indicator a monopoly is at play.

throwawaymaths 3y ago
Not really. Senior ux dev at <insert crate and barrel like company> told me that they A/B tested a more efficient flow and found conversion to sale dropped. Turns out when people have to put up with more hassle to buy something they get more committed, especially for high ticket items
- cratermoon 3y ago
  That’s not at all the kind of enshittification Amazon was doing.
  - throwawaymaths 3y ago
    It's not too far off
    - cratermoon 3y ago
      How is changing up site UX at all the same as changing the content but staying with the same UX?

bogomipz 3y ago

Which is in interesting because Amazon's "Leadership Principles" a are well-known and well-publicized part of Amazon's culture. Number 1 on that list is of course "Customer Obsession", which states: >"Customer Obsession: Leaders start with the customer and work backwards. They work vigorously to earn and keep customer trust. Although leaders pay attention to competitors, they obsess over customers."[1] It's probably no surprise that this is little more than a meme whose sole purpose is to be ceremonially regurgitated during job interviews. [1] https://www.amazon.jobs/content/en/our-workplace/leadership-principles https://www.amazon.jobs/content/en/our-workplace/leadership-...

MrRolleyes 3y ago
[dead]
azzthrooww 3y ago
It really isn't a meme. It's taken pretty seriously at the company, often gets cited in meetings as a reason to do (or not do) something, and is almost always referenced in large strategic projects/planning docs. It's even sometimes included in criteria for determining performance/promotions. The problem lies in the fact that there's no one single definition of who "the customer" is, and no one single definition of what the best thing for that customer is. One team might see customer obsession as making sure only the best ads are shown, but there's probably another team who thinks that being obsessed about customers means showing the _most_ ads, while a third team sees _the ad companies_ as "the customer" and thinks that being customer obsessed means making them as happy as possible. There's a weird side effect about being so serious about customer obsession. Like I mentioned earlier, it's often used as a promotion criteria, so people will come up with weird stuff and then spin it as "customer obsessed" so they can get promoted, even if it's something like showing more ads or constantly reminding people to buy something (which probably gets spun as "helping the customer to not miss out on a good deal" or something like that).
- bogomipz 3y ago
  >"The problem lies in the fact that there's no one single definition of who "the customer" is ..." From the post that we are commenting on here: >"... show that company executives, including former CEO Jeff Bezos, knowingly made changes to the e-commerce platform that boosted profits while harming consumers and sellers, and making the site less usable." It's pretty clear who the customer were here. It's literally all the parties that were not Amazon. Something that "gets cited in meetings" yet not applied in practice pretty much supports it being little more than meme status.
  - azzthrooww 3y ago
    Your quote listed two different distinct groups of people that are both customers of Amazon: consumers and sellers. And there's a third group that isn't listed: the ad companies which are also customers of Amazon. And what's best for one of those groups isn't necessarily what is best for the other group. So no, it's not very clear.