Monthly Archives: October 2009

Arbonne Urban Myth? The Results Approach Caused Arbonne’s Unprecedented Growth – Really?

Posted by on October 29, 2009 No comments

They say if you repeat any idea long enough, people will think it is true whether it is or not.

There are many urban myths about Arbonne but the one that is the most curious is this:

The introduction of the Results Approach in 2005 was the catalyst that propelled the company to its unprecedented growth and the field to unprecedented promotion levels from 2005 to 2007.

As a Coach and Trainer of Premeire Elite Athletes, I never base my strategy on anecdotal evidence. I always know the numbers. So what do the numbers say about the impact of the Results Approach on Arbonne’s growth over the last seven or more years? Only by doing this can we determine if the above statement is true or another Arbonne Urban Myth.

First, to help clarify, we need a timeline.

  1. April 2003: Arbonne releases RE9 at NTC
  2. April 2004: According to Eye-On-Arbonne stories the Originator of the Results Approach System (known as ORAS) made a decision, at NTC 2004, to start building using the “Puppy Dog” or Results Approach.
  3. August 2004: ORAS hits RVP
  4. March 2005: ORAS hits NVP

Now lets look at the history of Arbonne’s growth before, during and after this time frame.

  1. 2001 – 13.5%
  2. 2002 – 70.6%
  3. 2003 – 111.8
  4. 2004 – 98.2%
  5. 2005 – 164%
  6. 2006 – 88.3

Here is what the stats reveal. Long before the Results Approach hit the streets Arbonne was enjoying record breaking growth. In 2002 it was 70.6% growth. In 2003 it was 111.8% growth. And although the Results Approach was being used by ORAS in 2004, it was not a company wide system until late in  2005. So even the growth of 98.2% in 2004 cannot be attributed to the Results Approach. This is nearly 100% average growth each year for three years before the Results Approach was widely used in Arbonne.

Even the 164% growth in 2005 cannot be attributed totally to the Results Approach. Since the other business building systems that were used prior to the Results Approach were yeilding approximately 100% growth each year for three years, it is logical to conclude that at least 100% of the 164% was the result of business building systems other than the Results Approach.

And what happen in 2006 after the Results Approach had some time to cycle through? Arbonne had a sudden drop from 164% back to 88.3% growth. If the Results Approach was really the cause of Arbonne’s unprecedented growth, then as it continued to be accepted and utilized by a larger percentage of the Consultants, Arbonne should have experienced a corresponding increase in growth. But Arbonne did not. Why? It has to do with “The Balloon Effect” and the “Mathematics of Weakness“.

Our conclusion: The statement “The Results Approach was the cause of Arbonne’s unprecedented growth” is not true but is an Arbonne Urban Myth!

© copyright 2009 VoiceWind & Greg Loveless

© 2009, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Incoming search terms:

  • arbonne growth
  • arbonne growth history
  • sibley gammon
  • sibley gammon arbonne
Share

Should a Consultant Do the Arbonne Results Approach

Posted by on October 28, 2009 No comments

In the first post on this topic and in this series I listed those "Who Should Read the "Analysis of the Arbonne Results Approach". This included anyone who had never heard of the Arbonne Results Approach and those who had questions about it. It included those who were already Consultants whose Upline was recommending the Arbonne Results Approach as a business building system. And it included new recruits who had been asked to sign up with a team that was doing the Results Approach. The following is a summary of the Analysis of the Arbonne Results Approach and it is recommended that you read this before you commit to the Results Approach. To read the full post of any section, click on the title of that section.

  1. The Two Types of Volume in the Arbonne Results Approach. Unlike the other business building systems in Arbonne that create one type of retail volume, the Arbonne Results Approach creates two types of volume. All business building systems create "actual consumable volume" by selling product to customers. But the Arbonne Results Approach also creates "potential consumable volume". “Potential consumable volume” is volume in a network created by the purchase of Results Kits by business builders. Since these Result Kits are held by business builders they are not being consumed by a customer which means there will be no residual income from reorders. As a result, "potential consumable volume" stands outside Dr. Charles King’s “consumable product definition” which is one of the four key ingredients to look for in a successful business as stated in both the Arbonne Opportunity and Results Presentations.
  2. The Failure Rate in the Arbonne Results Approach is greater than in other systems and this is caused by the "potential consumable volume" created by the Results Approach Kits.
  3. The Potential Volume Generated by the Arbonne Results Approach is False Volume and Increases the Failure Rate. There is a correlation between the rate of failure and the percentage of "potential consumable volume" in a network.
  4. The Pyramid Scheme Tipping Point in the Arbonne Results Approach. As the "potential consumable volume" from the Results Approach increases as a percentage of the total volume in a network, there is a tipping point reached where that network begins to process as a pyramid. Failure to deal with this ethical issue taints the network involved, those that put such a system into motion, those that allow it to continue, those who profit from it and the company as well.
  5. The Ethical Dilemma Caused by the Arbonne Results Approach. Any upfront purchase of Results Kits places the sponsor and the new business builder in an ethical dilemma because their upfront risk can only be reduced by sponsoring business builders into the network with the same upfront risk they have, or by converting the Result Kits into consumable volume by selling them. But bringing in more Business Builders with upfront volume to replace the previous volume is by definition a pyramid. The only real option is to build the system by converting the "potential consumable volume" into "actual consumable volume". But since it is possible to use other Business Building Systems to build an Arbonne business, and without the upfront risk, why this system with risk? Because the Upline Consultant gets paid on the upfront volume in the Result Kits immediately even though it is all "potential consumable volume" and not "actual consumable volume". So this system can be more about the up-line’s pocket book than it is about the success and dreams of the new Consultant. For new Consultants reading this; or for those who are considering an Arbonne business — this is not the Arbonne culture.
  6. Results Approach Temporary Balloon Effect on Existing Networks. Beyond the ethical and legal outlined above, there is the simple fact that the potential consumable volume in the Results Approach creates a balloon effect on an existing network. This Balloon Effect can create a false sense that the Results Approach System works. The Balloon Effect is where an existing network that is generating say an average of $50,000 in retail sales each month, gets as many business builders as possible, and as many new recruits as possible to purchase Result Kits to do the Results Approach. Let's say each business builder purchases $1,000 in Result Kits and there are 30 business builders and new recruits. This will immediately increase the volume in this network by $30,000 dollars. This next part is the most important part of what you will read here. In the Results Approach System, your Upline will get paid on that volume whether or not you become successful in Arbonne. This is not the Arbonne Culture. In fact in the Business Presentations it says, "We become successful when we make others successful." This is true in the other Arbonne business building systems, but not necessarily true with the Arbonne Results Approach System.
  7. The Mathematics of Weakness in the Arbonne Results Approach. Even if you are able to overcome the risk and build your business with the Arbonne Results Approach, if you sponsor someone and they start to grow fast, vertically, this volume will pass out of your pay range. In the Arbonne Compensation Plan, security comes with a consumer network, not with a long leg of business builders stacked on top of the one another whre the volume pushes the Upline into a management level.
  8. Arbonne Results Approach is Fast Track Because of the Failure Volume: So where does the so called “Fast Track” volume come from? If one uses a non-Results Approach System to build an Arbonne Business, if a Consultant starts and then quits, the Upline Sponsor only gets paid on the amount of success that person had while they did the business. But if the Results Approach System is used, if a Consultant starts and then quits, the Upline Sponsor will get paid on all the volume in the upfront Result Kit orders. So in the Arbonne Results Approach System the up-line Consultant is paid before she makes the new Consultant successful. In fact she is paid even if the new Consultant fails. I call this type of revenue that comes from the upfront orders of Consultants that fail, “failure volume”. This "failure volume", from our research, is the main source of the "Fast Track" volume.
  9. Ethical & Unethical Use of the Arbonne Results Approach. In light of the above everyone has to ask themselves this question. Do I want to build an Arbonne business with a system that will produce more revenue, when all or most of this additional revenue is generated by the failure in the system?  These facts change everything. When the data indicates that the additional revenue is generated by the failure in the system, to implements the Results Approach, as opposed to any other business building system, ceases to be a business strategy decision. Rather, it is a decision that has both ethical and legal implication. In light of this, there is really only one correct response.
  10. Options to Make the Arbonne Results Approach Ethically Viable. In short the only way to insure that a network using the Arbonne Results Approach does not tip into a pyramid scheme and eliminates the "failure voluem", is to remove the full size Result Sets that have retail volume that the Upline Consultants get paid on. In place of these would be tester kits with a 3 to 7 days supply. These testers would then be classified as a business aid. Since Business Aids do not have retail volume attached to them, but are a business expense, this would prevent the upline from being paid on this business aid. It also eliminates the potential contamination that the full size systems are susceptible to.

Conclusion:

If someone wants you to build an Arbonne Business using the Arbonne Results Approach, and this includes the purchase of the Full Size Results Sets, you must accept the fact that a portion of the volume in your network will be generated by "potential consumable volume" from the Result Kits rather than "actual consumable volume" where the product is purchased and consumed by a customer who will reorder. As a result, due to the failure rate and thus the false volume in the network, at some point, somewhere in the localized network, where this failure occurs, the network will tip from a legitimate Multilevel Marketing Network of consumers into a network where the majority of the volume is from recruits purchasing product. When this happens, the network is a pyramid.

So if you are a new recruit or already a Consultant and your Upline wants you to build the business with the Full Size Result Kits, in light of the above, there are two possible explanatioins:

  1. They do not understand the difference between "potential consumable volume" and "actual consumable volume". This means, no matter what they say or how successful they say they are or have been, they do not fully understand the risks inherent in the Arbonne Results Approach.
  2. Or they do understand difference between "potential consumable volume" and "actual consumable volume" but choose to use the Results Approach anyway.

Either of these would necessarily make me nervous. Why?

If they fall into the first category they are asking you to use a Business Building System about which they do not fully understand the risks. And if they don't understand the risks they cannot protect your best interest.

If they fall into the later category they have consciously chosen to use a Business Building System where they obtain an upfront benefit based on the amount of risk assumed by those in their downline network. In this case they do not have your best interest in mind.

So you need to question them about this. At this point you may hear one or more of the following regarding the Arbonne Results Approach:

  1. This is the only way to build an Arbonne business.
  2. This is the best way to build an Arbonne business.
  3. This is the fastest way to build an Arbonne business.
  4. The most successful people in Arbonne build an Arbonne business this way.

I can tell you as an insider all of the above are false. So at this point you need to stop and do your due diligence. If you still can't get answers, you need to move up the food chain to their upline and continue to do so until you find someone who understands the risks the Arbonne Results Approach places on you and/or someone who will assist you in building an Arbonne business with another Business Building System. If after all that you still cannot find someone then call Arbonne at 1-800-ARBONNE and ask for a referral of someone else in your area that you could sign up under. Then take this person through the same process listed above. If they do not understand then continue this process until you find someone who does, and is willing to work with you. One more point — I get tired of hearing "The way you come into the business is they way you will bring others into the business". This, to be blunt, is a hard line sales technique. And like the other statements about the Arbonne Results Approach listed above, it is false. For example, my wife came into Arbonne by using the product and falling in love with it. She was so impressed she would share it with others. As a result she started receiving what she calls "Thank You Checks" from Arbonne. These continued to grow. Then she had a turning point where she decided to treat Arbonne as a business and not a hobby. (My definition of a hobby is there is more money going out than coming in.) My wife built her business doing One-on-Ones. She was a designer and when clients came over for a fitting she would share Arbonne with them. As some of these clients became business builders some did One-on-Ones as she did, but others did Group Presentations. She even had one client who purchased a Normal to Oily Set and my wife bartered the cost of the product in exchange for our son's modeling photo shoot. A few months later this person called because she needed to reorder and wanted to barter again. But we did not need another photo shoot so my wife recommended that she host a presentation and earn her product, which she did. At that presentation she not only earned her product, she made a few dollars profit and signed up several business builders. This client is now an EVNP and of those that signed up that night one is an ENVP and two more are RVP's. My point is each of them came into Arbonne differently but they have all become successful in Arbonne. One final point. It is a fact that the overwhelming majority of those who are the most successful in Arbonne do not do the Arbonne Results Approach, they do Group Presentations. Another inconvenient truth working against the Arbonne Results Approach. © copyright 2009 VoiceWind & Greg Loveless

© 2009 – 2010, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Incoming search terms:

  • pyramid scheme presentations
Share

Summary and Conclusion – Arbonne Results Approach Analysis

Posted by on October 27, 2009 No comments

The following is a summary of the main points contained in original 14 posts of "The Arbonne Results Approach Analysis". For the full information on any sections below, click on the heading title link and it will take you to that post.

The Two Types of Volume in the Arbonne Results Approach:

  1. Actual Consumable Volume: In the Group Presentation and the One-on-One Systems all the volume comes from orders placed by customers who in most cases will use and consume the product which will result in a large percentage of these persons reordering. This system produces a large consumer base with residual income which makes for a stable network.
  2. Potential Consumable Volume: In the Results Approach System all the volume from the "Result Kits" is "potential consumable volume". It only becomes "actual consumable volume" when the "Result Kit" is purchased or generates a purchase of a Results Set. In addition, any volume in a network that is "potential consumable volume", since it is not being consumed, it stands outside Dr. Charles King's "consumable product definition" which is one of the keys to a successful business.

Failure Rate in the Arbonne Results Approach:

  1. Only 3% of the population actual does what it takes, and does what it takes long enough to be successful.
  2. As a result of the above there is always failure in the system.
  3. But the data from our analysis showed that the failure rate was significantly increased in those networks that used the Results Approach.
  4. The greater the percentage of volume in a network that is from the Results Approach, the greater the failure rate.
  5. The cause of this is the "potential consumable volume" from the Results Kits. The more "potential consumable volume" there is the greater the risk that this "potential consumable volume" will never be converted from potential to "actual consumable volume".

There are two issues caused by the data we outlined above.

  1. The first is the Result Kits are never converted into consumable volume which means that line flashes out and dies. Because if they cannot move their kits, they are not going to bring anyone else into Arbonne.
  2. This impacts residual income. In a Group or One-on-One Presentation System all volume has the potential to be residual income, for those Kits that are not moved there is a 0% chance that there will be a reorder. Thus the impact on residual income is dramatic and devastating due to the 50 to 80% failure rate and the 0% of reorders from Result Kits that are not moved.

Potential Volume is False Volume and Increases Failure Rate in the Arbonne Results Approach:

  1. Because there is a known 50% to 80% failure rate in networks that do the Results Approach.
  2. And because this menas 50% to 80% of the upfront potential volume from Result Kits will never be converted to actual consumable volume.
  3. This means the "potential consumable volume" in a network is false volume.
  4. The greater the percentage of false volume in a network, the greater the odds are that this network will fail.

The Pyramid Scheme Tipping Point in the Arbonne Results Approach:

  1. The key element that distinguishes a legitimate Multilevel Marketing Network from a Pyramid Scheme is a legitimate network is compensated for selling product to consumers and establishing a market.
  2. Pyramid Schemes on the other hand make their profit on volume sales to new recruits who buy the product.
  3. As the DSA Website says: "IF YOU COULD BE STUCK WITH UNSOLD INVENTORY, BEWARE! Legitimate companies which require inventory purchases will usually “buy back” unsold products if you decide to quit the business. Some state laws and the DSA Code of Ethics require buy-backs for at least 90% of your original cost."

What does this mean for the Results Approach?

  1. Since the Result Kits are product sold to recruits
  2. Since there is a known 50% to 80% failure rate
  3. That means 50% to 80% of the recruits will be left holding product
  4. This percentage tips an Arbonne business from a legitimate network into a pyramid
  5. The attempt to escape this reality by saying the percentage of failure volume compared to the overall volume in the network is minimal does not address the ethical and legal issues.
  6. Even if the total percentage of failure volume in the entire network stays below the tipping point, this does not mean the localized network that was processing 100% as a pyramid scheme is now legitimate.
  7. Those impacted by a localized network processing 100% as a pyramid, are impacted 100% by a pyramid scheme.
  8. Failure to deal with this ethical issue taints the network involved, those that put such a system into motion, those that allow it to continue, those who profit from it and the company as well.

Transfer of Ethical Responsibility:

The practice by Upline Consultants and by Arbonne Corporate of using the Independent Consultant Agreement as a sheild to protect themselves is not a legitimate ethical option and, now with notification, is not a legitimate legal option either. This is especially true in light of the fact that there is a business model that will eliminate the upfront potential volume so Arbonne Corporate does not have to walk this tight rope.

 

The Ethical Dilemma Caused by the Arbonne Results Approach:

Any upfront purchase of Results Kits places the new business builder in an ethical dilemma because their upfront risk can only be reduced by adding more business builders to the network with the same upfront risk they have so they can be compensated. Here are some ways out of this ethical dilemma.

  1. The new recruit could wait and see if she can find four people to place the same upfront order thereby reducing or eliminating her risk. But then the new recruit would have to allow her new recruits to do the same. The problem is that this can go on ad infinitum down the food chain. But this fails because at some point this process has to end and when it does someone is holding "potential" not "actual consumable volume".
  2. The Upline Consultant can guarantee to buy back any "potential" volume that is not moved. But this ethic is not offered because it would place new recruits at a high risk and thus no one would bite on the offer.
  3. Upline Consultant could (and this has been done) explain to the new recruit that they have 45 days to move the product and if they cannot they can return it to Arbonne under the 45 money back guarantee. But this is not an ethical solution as this 45 day money back guarantee was implemented for the customer not to reduce a business builders risk.

So if there is a system that can build an Arbonne business without the upfront risk, why this system with risk?

Because the Upline Consultant gets paid immediately on the up front volume from the Result Kits even though this is all potential and not actual consumable volume. So this system is more about the up-line’s pocket book than it is about the success and dreams of the new Consultant. This is not the Arbonne culture.

 

Results Approach Temporary Balloon Effect on Existing Networks:

Beyond the ethical and legal there is the simple fact that the potential consumable volume in the Results Approach creates a balloon effect on an existing network.

What is the balloon effect?

  1. Let's say you have an existing RVP network that is doing $120,000 a month in volume. This volume is all product sold to consumers so it is actual consumable volume.
  2. This network has 30 active business builders in it.
  3. The RVP decides they are going to do the Results Approach and all 30 business builders purchase $2,500 in Result Kits.
  4. $2,500 in Result Kits times 30 Business Builders equals $75,000 in additional income over the existing actual consumable income in the network.
  5. This $75,000 added to the $120,000 totals $195,000 and pushes this RVP into qualification.
  6. But the additional $75,000 is all potential consumable volume and what ever portion is not converted from potential to actual consumable volume will eventually flush out of the network.
  7. The amount of potential consumable volume that is not converted to actual consumable volume will be the amount of eventual down turn in the network.

The Mathematics of Weakness in the Arbonne Results Approach:

  1. The Results Approach is really a One-on-One System.
  2. Thus the fact that a Consultant using a One-on-One System has to compensate for this by increasing activity is a weakness of the Results Approach.
  3. To compensate for this the upfront quantity of Results Approach Kits are increased .
  4. But this causes the network to build faster with business builders and consequently with less consumers.
  5. As a result the potential consumable volume form the upfront orders moves down the network levels more rapidly.
  6. This in turn causes the volume from the Results Kits to more quickly pass out of the pay range of the Upline Consultant. When this happens their paycheck suddenly decreases accordingly.
  7. The only way to correct this is for this Upline Consultant to add more business builders into the system directly to her or to build a consumer network.
  8. The result of the above scenario is what I call "The Mathematics of Weakness" in the Result Approach.

Arbonne Results Approach is Fast Track Because of the Failure Volume:

  1. Because the Results Approach is really a One-on-One System, the increased volume cannot be attributed to the efficiency of the system.
  2. Our research indicates those networks that used the Results Approach without large upfront orders grew at or below those that used a Group Presentation System.
  3. So where does the "Fast Track" volume come from?
  4. In a non-Results Approach System if a Consultant starts and then quits, the Upline Sponsor only gets paid on the amount of success that person had while they did the business.
  5. But in a Results Approach System, if a Consultant starts and then quits, the Upline Sponsor will get paid on all the volume in the upfront orders or the front loaded volume.
  6. So in the second case the up-line Consultant was paid before she made the new Consultants successful. In fact she was paid even though the new Consultant may have failed. I call this type of revenue that comes from the upfront orders of Consultants that fail, “failure volume”.

Ethical & Unethical Use of the Arbonne Results Approach:

  1. Because in the Results Approach System the Upline gets paid on this volume whether or not those in her downline can move the Results Kits and convert that volume from potential to actual consumable volume.
  2. And because there is a 50% to 80 % failure rate.
  3. And because a large portion of this additional volume in the Results Approach Network comes from the failure in the system.
  4. In light of this everyone has to ask themselves this question. Do I want to build an Arbonne business with a system that will produce more revenue, when all or most of this additional revenue is generated by the failure in the system?
  5. In light of the information above, "Large Upfront Orders Make the Arbonne Results Approach Unethical".
  6. The above is not an incidental consequence. These facts change everything. When data indicates that the additional revenue is generated by the failure in the system, a decision to use the Results Approach System as opposed to any other system ceases to be a business strategy decision. Rather, it is now both an ethical decision and a legal decision, and, in light of this data there is really only one correct answer.
  7. The data we have uncovered would indicates that there is an ethical way to build an Arbonne business using the Results Approach, but a Results Approach System which includes upfront retail volume that the Upline Consultant gets paid on prior to it being actual consumable volume; this system is not included in this ethic.

Options to Make the Arbonne Results Approach Ethically Viable:

  1. The first option is for Arbonne Corporate to issue a directive. But specific direction could be a violation of this independent consultant relationship. As a result any option that could only be enforced by corporate fiat is not workable in the case of Arbonne.
  2. The second option falls into the category of the slippery slop. In these cases a recommendation is provided by the Arbonne Corporate that would keep the Arbonne Results Approach within the ethical guidelines such as only 2 or 3 Results Approach Kits are allowed. This would then reduce the large upfront orders that result in front loading and then push the network over the pyramid scheme tipping point. However, due to Arbonne Corporates inability to enforce this limit without violating the Independent Consultant relationship this option is not workable.
  3. The third options is the use of sample packs in conjunction with the Results Approach Kits. This is one option that Arbonne Corporate attempted to implement. For details visit the Arbonne University Results Approach Training. But enforcement of this once again runs into the conflicts as Arbonne Corporate directing an Independent Consultant. To be absolutely open and honest about this, and with all due respect to Arbonne Corporate, this strategy was less a solution to the ethical issues the Results Approach inflicted upon the Arbonne field and appears to be more of a basic CYA for Arbonne Corporate. Because the only issue the sample pack addressed was cleanliness and thus Arbonne Corporate liability in this regard. The training did not address the ethical and legal issue of the upfront volume from the Result Kits. In fact the Arbonne University Training made this issue even worse because a new Consultant can still be enticed into purchasing a large quantity of these Result Kits which still places the new Consultant at risk, and the Arbonne Results Approach Training appears to give the Arbonne seal of approval to this system. Thus Arbonne is complicit in this risk. This strategy implemented by Arbonne in this Results Approach Training, was legalese, and created a wall of protection around Arbonne Corporate while at the same time it left those in the field totally vulnerable to the very same ethic from which Arbonne Corporate had protected itself. In essence, the field had been left to swim with the sharks as Arbonne profited from this system.
  4. A fourth option would be for Arbonne Corporate to force the Sponsoring Consultant to buy back any Result Approach Kits that are not sold. This would bring even those Consultant’s networks that use large upfront Results Approach orders in line with the standards as set out by the DSA web site. But Arbonne Corporate would once again be on shaky ground when it came to enforcing this on an Independent Consultant. Not to mention there would be a lot of “he said, she said” and no one wins in these situations which would ultimately leave Arbonne exposed.
  5. A fifth option would be for Arbonne Corporate itself to buy back the Kits. But this would only provide greater incentive to those Consultants who were pushing the unethical boundaries with the Result Approach Kits to push them even farther. After all, if you have a sugar daddy who is going to pick up the tab if those you sponsor cannot move the Result Approach Kits, why worry about whether the prospect can actually move the kits. Do the hard sale and move on to the next. Can anyone say Fannie May and Freddie Mac.
  6. The sixth option would be to leave the Results Approach System in tact but this allows a consumable product with retail volume to be purchased as a business aid which allows the upline Consultant to benefit monetarily from this volume. So to prevent Consultants from returning any Results Approach Kits that are purchased in large quantities to Arbonne, or to prevent these Result Approach Kits from appearing on E-bay,  each Result Approach Kit would have to be tagged with a unique ID so it could be traced back to the source. This option is not feasible because it is cost prohibitive.

Our Recommendation that Creates an Ethic Proof Results Approach System:

The only viable option would be for Arbonne to provide Consultants with testers that have a 3 to 7 day supply and are self contained. This solution has the following advantages:

  1. It eliminates the potential contamination that the full size systems are susceptible to.
  2. It does not require a directive or edict from Arbonne Corporate thus protecting the legal separation between Arbonne Corporate and the Independent Consultant’s business.
  3. It would allow Arbonne Corporate to categorize these testers as a business aids. This is important because items that are classified as Business Aids have no retail volume attached to them. Consequently this would take away the incentive to up-line Consultants to push large upfront orders so they could receive monetary compensation on Results Approach Kits.
  4. It would eliminate the need for Arbonne to dance the ethical line by on the one hand supporting the Results Approach System (Trainings, etc.) and on the other hand recommending that Consultants:
    • Use sample packs in conjunction with the Results Approach Kits (which they cannot enforce)
    • That the Consultants are responsible for any contamination to the Results Approach Kits (which again they cannot enforce)
    • Try to prevent front loading by questioning those who order large quantities of RE9 Systems (which again they cannot enforce)

© 2009 – 2010, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Incoming search terms:

  • failure rate wind
Share

Book Review – “God According to God” by Gerald Schroeder

Posted by on October 26, 2009 No comments

Coming Soon!

© 2009, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Share

Obama White House Verses Chamber of Commerce is Elitism

Posted by on October 25, 2009 No comments

The Obama White House says they are going around the Chamber of Commerce because they want to have a a direct relationship with businesses.

But who have they met with? Only large Corporate entities. And that is all they can efficiently meet with. They cannot meet with all the small business owners that make up the majority of the Chamber of Commerce Membership.

They accuse the Chamber of Commerce of being an elite club that does not represent all businesses in America. But these direct relationships between the White House and Businesses will result in an even more elite club — a political aliance made up of only those businesses that agree with the Obama Administration on certain political issues.

This type of elite club does not even get close to representing the interest of small business owners.

© 2009, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Incoming search terms:

  • chamber of commerce elitism
Share

Review of “I Refuse to Lead a Dieing Church” by Paul Nixon

Posted by on October 24, 2009 1 comment

Title: “I Refuse to Lead a Dieing Church”
Author: Paul Nixon
Publisher: The Pilgrim Press, Cleveland
ISBN: 978-0-8298-1759-1 (softcover)

Review:

The two most important concepts Nixon has in his book are in chapter “Choosing Life Over Death” and “Choosing Frontier Over Fortree”.

The key information in “Choosing Life Over Death” are taken from pages 31 to 33.

“In stagnant and dying churches, the members usually turn inward and become a bit selfish in what they expect of the church; decisions are made based upon what is most convenient and comfortable for the church members rather than what is expedient in effectively serving the community people.”

“Often the most helpful persons to partner with are inactive members…who have grown bored or frustrated with their church over the years and who may have turned their energy toward other good projects in the community…”

“I urge you to take names. Keep a list of the bright-eyed people, the people who are energized by the thought of their church living and thriving in ministry with a new set of people…”

“Grow this list of bright-eyed vision share holders—both inside the church membership and beyond it! Keep a roll. This roll is your real church roll…reframe your ministry toward this roll of living disciples…”

“The bright-eyed people form the green shoot poking its way to life from what appeared to be a dead tree. Growing this new shoot is your main task as a turnaround leader. This shoot, these people are the living church you are called by God to lead.”

The key information in “Choosing Frontier Over Fortress” are taken from pages 88 to 89.

The historical statistics that Nixon outlines in this chapter paints a very powerful picture.

  • “From 1790 to 1830, the congregations that would become the United Methodist grew from 58,000 in 1790 to 501,000 in 1830.”
  • “They went from 1.5% to 5.1% of the US population.”
  • “These churches were so nimble that one third of the Methodist Episcopal congregations in 1830 had no building.”
  • “By 1840 the groups growth rate was slowing.”
  • “The correlation between the slow-down of the Methodist movement’s expansion over the next century and the steady construction of larger more substantial buildings is nothing short of remarkable…there is definitely a correlation: the more building-oriented any church becomes, the more it will be tempted to take on the settle attitudes and habits of an institution, and to leave the free-spirited, frontier-oriented attitudes and practices that grew it to start with.”

I would highly recommend this book to any Church Leader, lay or professional. It cuts through the common assumptions and misconceptions we all have when we consider how to turn a church around. It will eliminate the mistakes that are often made that waist time and resources and then create burn out.

How this Book Helped Us:

As the Church Chairman, I read this book when our church, Olathe Covenant, was going through a difficult transition period. Our attendance had been on a steady decline for over 5 years. For a three year period we had not a single couple or family under 40 years of age visit and stay. Our lead pastor accepted another call. Our youth director accepted another call. We were over $24,000 in debt.

After reading this book and “Church Unique” by Will Mancini (click here for our review) the church Leadership Team decided to follow the guidelines and recommendations in these two books. We did this even if these guidelines ran contrary to those provided by our denominational conference leadership.

As a result we chose to go with a non-traditional model of a video worship experience. From August to December of 2008 we used LifeChurch.tv Message videos in place of traditional pulpit supply. We did this for several reasons:

  1. This would make us “Unique” in our area which is a main point of Mancini’s book.
  2. The Messages from LifeChurch.tv were free so this saved on the cost of pulpit supply.
  3. The concept, worship experience and the content of the LifeChurch.tv Messages by Craig Groeschel were “X” & “Y” generation friendly.

When we had our Annual Meeting in December of 2008 the members voted to continue with this video worship experience. Subsequently, in February of 2009 the congregation voted, with only one dissenting vote, to become a LifeChurch.tv Network Church. Since then we have had seven families visit and three have remained and have become active in church ministries. In addition 6 singles have visited with one continuing to visit and another who has become a member of our Praise Team.

© 2009, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Incoming search terms:

  • i refuse to lead a dying church review
Share

Review of “Church Unique” by Will Mancini

Posted by on October 24, 2009 1 comment

Title: “Church Unique”
Subtitle: How missional leaders cast vision, capture culture, and create movement.
Author: Will Mancini
Publisher: Leadership Network Publication
ISBN: 978-0-7879-9683-3 (hardcover)

Review:

I would highly recommend this book to any Church Leader, lay or professional. It cuts through the common assumptions and misconceptions we all have when we consider how to turn a church around. It will eliminate the mistakes that are often made that waist time and resources and then create burn out.

How This Book Helped Our Church:

As the Church Chairman, I read this book when our church, Olathe Covenant, was going through a difficult transition period. Our attendance had been on a steady decline for over 5 years. For a three year period we had not a single couple or family under 40 years of age visit and stay. Our lead pastor accepted another call. Our youth director accepted another call. We were over $24,000 in debt.

After reading this book and “I Refuse to Lead a Dieing Church” by Paul Nixon, the church Leadership Team decided to follow the guidelines and recommendations in these two books. We did this even if these guidelines ran contrary to those provided by our denominational conference leadership.

As a result we chose to go with a non-traditional model of a video worship experience. From August to December of 2008 we used LifeChurch.tv Message videos in place of traditional pulpit supply. We did this for several reasons:

  1. This would make us “Unique” in our area which is a main point of Mancini’s book.
  2. The Messages from LifeChurch.tv were free so this saved on the cost of pulpit supply.
  3. The concept, worship experience and the content of the LifeChurch.tv Messages by Craig Groeschel were “X” & “Y” generation friendly.

When we had our Annual Meeting in December of 2008 the members voted to continue with this video worship experience. Subsequently, in February of 2009 the congregation voted, with only one dissenting vote, to become a LifeChurch.tv Network Church. Since then we have had seven families (all under the age of 40) visit and three have remained and have become active in church ministries. In addition 6 singles (all under the age of 40) have visited with one continuing to visit and another who has become a member of our Praise Team.

In addition to the above we have paid off our $24,000 of debt. Our attendance has stabilized. We have been in the black for over nine months. After our worship team leader decided to leave last fall because he did not agree with the LifeChurch.tv model, we were able to bring in a new Worship Team Leader who has published two CD’s, (one vocal and the other insturmental), and he is working on a third that will be Praise music. We just completed a much needed and expensive repair, seal and restriping of our parking lot. And now we plan to turn our focus on the interior of the worship center to bring it up to LifeChurch.tv standards.

So what was the key to the turn around? The Leadership Team walked through the process in “Church Unique” and as a result we eliminated some cherished ideas. The most important idea was this — that by adding another ministry, this would be the silver bullet that would turn our church around. Rather, as Will Mancini discusses in his book, we simplified by throwing everything out and then we came up with three basic ministries that we were going to focus on and do well. No matter the pain, the rest of the ministies were eliminated.

The three main ministries we focused on were:

  1. The LifeChurch.tv Worship Experience: We decided we would follow this format even it it made some uncomfortable because it’s not about us, it’s about those who need Christ. See Craig Groeschel’s Message “Dangerous Church 2″ (Message Week #1 and Message Week #2). Also see Andy Stanley’s Message on LifeChurch.tv regarding the Church should be “A Place for Everyone“.
  2. Children’s Ministries: We focused on this area rather than trying to do all the ministries for adults and high school, etc.
  3. LifeGroups: We made a focused effort to get as many persons as possible in LifeGroups. In the past many of our members connected intimately only with the pastor on Sunday morning. Since we were doing a video Message from LifeChurch.tv, and there was no live person in the pulpit, so we replaced it with the intimacy in the LifeGroups.
© copyright 2009 VoiceWind & Greg Loveless

© 2009, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Incoming search terms:

  • comments on will mancini church unique
Share

Table of Contents – Arbonne Results Approach Analysis

Posted by on October 24, 2009 No comments

For convenience, I have included below links to all the posts on the Arbonne Results Approach Analysis. When read in the order listed here they closely mirror the original analysis dated August 26, 2009.

All contents of this analysis and the posts herein are ©copyrighted 2009 by VoiceWind and Greg Loveless.

Part 1: Who Should Read the “Analysis of the Arbonne Results Approach”

Part 2: Overview of the “Analysis of the Arbonne Results Approach”

Part 3: Author & Data in the Analysis of the Arbonne Results Approach

Part 4: The Debate Over Systems – “Analysis of the Arbonne Results Approach”

Part 5: The Two Types of Volume in the Arbonne Results Approach

Part 6: Failure Rate in the Arbonne Results Approach

Part 7: Potential Volume is False Volume and Increases Failure Rate in the Arbonne Results Approach

Part 8: The Pyramid Scheme Tipping Point in the Arbonne Results Approach

Part 9: The Ethical Dilemma Caused by the Arbonne Results Approach

Part 10: Results Approach Temporary Balloon Effect on Existing Networks

Part 11: The Mathematics of Weakness in the Arbonne Results Approach

Part 12: Arbonne Results Approach is Fast Track Because of the Failure Volume

Part 13: Ethical & Unethical Use of the Arbonne Results Approach

Part 14: Options to Make the Arbonne Results Approach Ethically Viable

©copyrighted 2009 by VoiceWind & Greg Loveless


© 2009, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Share

Options to Make the Arbonne Results Approach Ethically Viable

Posted by on October 23, 2009 No comments

There are several methods that would make the Results Approach ethically viable. However, analysis of these options reveal that they fall into the following categories.

  1. The first option is for Arbonne Corporate to issue a directive. But this is only viable in a standard corporate environment. Because in a corporate environment, the representative who is in direct contact with the public, can be controlled by company directives. But this method is not viable in an MLM enviornment like Arbonne where the Consultant is by Federal Law an Independent Business entity. In these cases specific direction could be a violation of this independent consultant relationship. As a result any option that could only be enforced by corporate fiat is not workable in the case of Arbonne.
  2. The second option falls into the category of the slippery slop. In these cases a recommendation is provided by the Arbonne Corporate that would keep the Arbonne Results Approach within the ethical guidelines such as only 2 or 3 Results Approach Kits are allowed. This would then reduce the large upfront orders that result in front loading and then push the network over the pyramid scheme tipping point. However, due to Arbonne Corporates inability to enforce this limit without violating the Independent Consultant relationship this option is not workable.
  3. The third options is the use of sample packs in conjunction with the Results Approach Kits. This is one option that Arbonne Corporate attempted to implement. For details visit the Arbonne University Results Approach Training. But enforcement of this once again runs into the conflicts between Arbonne Corporate directing an Independent Consultant. To be absolutely open and honest about this, and with all due respect to Arbonne Corporate, this strategy was less a solution to the ethical issues the Results Approach inflicted upon the Arbonne field and appears to be more of a basic CYA for Arbonne Corporate. This strategy, through legalese,  created a wall of protection around Arbonne Corporate while at the same time it left those in the field totally funerable to the very same ethic from which Arbonne Corporate had protected itself. In essence, the field had been left to swim with the sharks.
  4. A fourth option would be for Arbonne Corporate to force the Sponsoring Consultant to buy back any Result Approach Kits that are not sold. This would bring even those Consultant’s networks that use large upfront Results Approach orders in line with the standards as set out by the DSA web site. But Arbonne Corporate would once again be on shaky ground when it came to enforcing this on an Independent Consultant. Not to mention there would be a lot of “he said, she said” and no one wins in these situations which would ultimately leave Arbonne exposed. And this does not address the issue of Kits that are compromised.
  5. A fifth option would be for Arbonne Corporate itself to buy back the Kits. But this would only provide greater incentive to those Consultants who were pushing the unethical boundaries with the Result Approach Kits to push them even farther. After all, if you have a sugar daddy who is going to pick up the tab if those you sponsor cannot move the Result Approach Kits, why worry about whether the prospect can actually move the kits. Do the hard sale and move on to the next. Can anyone say Fannie May and Freddie Mac.
  6. The sixth option would be to leave the Results Approach System in tact but this allows a consumable product with retail volume to be purchased as a business aid which allows the upline Consultant to benefit monetarily from this volume. So to prevent Consultants from returning any Results Approach Kits that are purchased in large quantities to Arbonne, or to prevent these Result Approach Kits from appearing on E-bay,  each Result Approach Kit would have to be tagged with a unique ID so it could be traced back to the source. This option is not feasible because it is cost prohibitive.

Our Recommendation that Creates an Ethic Proof Results Approach System:

The only viable option would be for Arbonne to provide Consultants with testers that have a 3 to 7 day supply and are self contained. This solution has the following advantages:

  1. It eliminates the potential contamination that the full size systems are susceptible to.
  2. It does not require a directive or edict from Arbonne Corporate thus protecting the legal separation between Arbonne Corporate and the Independent Consultant’s business.
  3. It would eliminate the need for Arbonne to dance the ethical line by on the one hand supporting the Results Approach System (Trainings, etc.) and on the other hand recommending that Consultants:
    • Use sample packs in conjunction with the Results Approach Kits (which they cannot enforce)
    • That the Consultants are responsible for any contamination to the Results Approach Kits (which again they cannot enforce)
    • Try to prevent front loading by questioning those who order large quantities of RE9 Systems (which again they cannot enforce)
  4. It would allow Arbonne Corporate to categorize these testers as a business aids. This is important because items that are classified as Business Aids have no retail volume attached to them. Consequently this would take away the incentive to up-line Consultants to push large upfront orders so they could receive monetary compensation on Results Approach Kits.

All posts regarding the Arbonne Results Approach Analysis

© copyright 2009 VoiceWind & Greg Loveless

© 2009, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Share

Ethical & Unethical Use of the Arbonne Results Approach

Posted by on October 23, 2009 No comments

In light of the previous post Arbonne Results Approach is Fast Track Because of the Failure Volume it is obvious that the increase in volume in a Results Approach Network, as compared to the volume in a Group Presentation Network, comes from the volume in the large upfront orders because the upline gets paid on this volume whether or not those in her downline can move the Results Kits and convert that volume from potential to actual consumable volume. And because there is a 50% to 80 % failure rate, a large portion of this additional volume in the Results Approach Network comes from the failure in the system.

Large Upfront Orders Make the Arbonne Results Approach Unethical:

In light of this everyone has to ask themselves this question. Do I want to build an Arbonne business with a system that will produce more revenue, when all or most of this additional revenue is generated by the failure in the system?

This is not an incidental consequence. These facts change everything. When data indicates that the additional revenue is generated by the failure in the system, a decision to use the Results Approach System as opposed to any other system ceases to be a business strategy decision. Rather, it is now an ethical decision and, in light of this data there is really only one correct answer. The data we have uncovered would indicates that there is an ethical way to build an Arbonne business using the Results Approach, but a Results Approach System which includes large upfront orders is not included in this ethic.

If you disagree, before you respond remember what John C. Maxwell says about ethics.

“There is no such thing as business ethics. Just ethics! Those who use one ethic for family, another ethic for their spiritual life and another ethic for business will always get into trouble. There are not different types of ethics. There is just ethics.”

Ethical Use of the Results Approach:

I mentioned at the beginning of this article that Linda has Consultants in her organization who do the Results Approach and are successful. If what I have just laid out is true, how can that be and why would Linda allow it; how could she ethically allow it? It has to do with balance and quantity. Those Consultants in Linda’s network who are building a successful business and use the Results Approach use it as a supplemental to the Group or One-on-One Presentations. If someone cannot get to the presentation then a Results drop off is used or they do the Results with certain people. This causes two main differences:

  1. They are not building their network with large up front orders so there is no false volume in the network.
  2. They are creating a network of consumers and the Results Approach is just another method to accomplish that.

This is why the Consultants in Linda’s network who are using the Results Approach are successful. Most use it as a supplemental to the Groups Presentation System. As a Result, the percentage of Potential Consumable Volume in their network is minimal or zero and as a result they have taken the risk of the “Potential Consumable Volume”, the “Pyramid Tipping Point” and the “Mathematics of Weakness” out of their networks all by eliminating large upfront orders. In so doing they have also altered the ethic.

All posts regarding the Arbonne Results Approach Analysis

© copyright 2009 VoiceWind & Greg Loveless

© 2009, VoiceWind. . .Greg Loveless. All rights reserved.

Share

© 2008-2012 VoiceWind All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright