 |
          |
AN INVESTIGATIVE NEWS SERIES ON THE STANDARDS AND PRACTICES OF THE BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU START WITH TRUTH |
| V 1.4 Feb 2010 | ||
 |
||
| TRUST
LINK. THE REAL STORY. |
|
A new feature has graced the pages of the
Los Angeles BBB website. You'll come across it whenever you look
up a business. It looks like this: When you click on this link it takes you to a list of customer reviews and gives a community "TrustLink Rating." We thought we'd do a little experiment and look up the Disneyland Resort (rated "A" by the LA BBB), right here in Southern California. Here's the link to their TrustLink reviews and an excerpted screen shot of what you'll see. Interesting, only two stars out of five. That's a "D" where I come from.  |
|
|
|
| On the surface, this seems an about
face from the BBB's official position that they're the experts and
their opinion on the worthiness of a business is the only one that
matters. TrustLink actually opens things up to the public
to write reviews and pass along a community "Grade" for each business
on the LA BBB website. This concept is so totally out of
character with what we know of the LA BBB that we had to dig
deeper. Fortunately, our internal BBB sources came through
again. Here are excerpts of internal BBB memos that explain the
reasons behind TrustLink's creation. The first mention of TrustLink that we found is in the minutes of an August 8, 2008 BOC Teleconferencing Meeting. We find that TrustLink is the brainchild of Mr. William Mitchell of the Los Angeles Better Business Bureau, the gentlemen who brought us the 2008 BBB Grade Algorithm. Minutes of BOCTeleconference Meeting
August 8, 2008 BOC members Sheryl Bilbrey (Chair), Kevin Sanders, Beverly Baskin, Rick Brinkley, and Linda Carmody were joined by Bill Mitchell, BBB Colton, and Jerry Shipman, BBB Albuquerque for a teleconference on the TrustLink program. Steve Salter of CBBB participated as recorder. The BOC had earlier sent a list of questions about TrustLink to Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Shipman, along with the other three “Caliber BBB” CEOs. (Questions appended at the end of these minutes.) Mr. Mitchell responded to the first few questions collectively, i.e. why was TrustLink a separate, for-profit corporation and who owned the shares? He described TrustLink as a collaborative effort among five BBBs (Colton, Albuquerque, Asheville, Santa Barbara, and West Palm Beach, collectively “the Caliber BBBs”). The collaboration included financial contributions from Colton, Albuquerque, and Asheville, and the others could contribute in future. A social networking site is large, requires a lot of coding and business rules, uses a back end database and is expensive. Mr. Mitchell stated that a corporation seemed the simplest way to pool resources and return investments to the partners. TrustLink is owned by the BBBs involved, not individuals. It has no directors or officers yet. This means TrustLink is a for-profit corporation, owned by the Caliber BBB gang of five, that is directly piggybacking on and benefiting from their involvement and participation with the Better Business Bureau. This is in direct violation of the BBB conflict of interest policy. In defending their position, Mr. Mitchell said there were two problems inherent with including the TrustLink service on the BBB website.
Mr. Sanders returned to the question of the need for a for-profit corporation, asking what expectations existed for return on investment? Mr. Mitchell answered that ROI is traditional when one has equity in a project. TrustLink has no revenue today but may down the road, through upselling of TrustLink services to BBB Accredited Businesses or through advertising. In that case the contributing BBBs would be entitled to return on their initial investment. On the question of BBBs operating for-profit arms, Mr. Shipman (an original TrustLink founding partner) noted that it is not unusual for BBBs to do so. When asked, he cited Akron, OH as offering insurance services to Accredited Businesses. The BOC asked why the Caliber BBBs had not chosen to use a vendor approach, giving the example of Adeptis BBBs funding development of software on behalf of the group, without expectation of a dollar return. Mr. Shipman said such an approach could have been used, and Mr. Mitchell noted that Adeptis was a separate corporation. Mr. Mitchell suggested that if BBBs were to get together today to build a new MIS system, it would probably be a for-profit model like TrustLink. He also pointed out that the BBB was getting increasingly affected by competition from websites like Angie's List and Yelp. A benefit of customer reviews in TrustLink that the Caliber BBBs had seen to date was that services like restaurants and hotels tended to receive a lot of reviews. These businesses don’t tend to be BBB members, and TrustLink could build our ties with the hospitality/service industries. The BOC then asked whether BBB branding of TrustLink would be a deal breaker. Both Mitchell and Shipman said yes, they had tried that approach and didn’t believe it would work at this time. Mr. Brinkley asked what the end game was, then, and Mr. Shipman said that over time they would try to bring TrustLink users over to BBB services. But immediate BBB branding of TrustLink wouldn’t work. In closing, Ms. Baskin of the BOC stated she had a concern with any for-profit entity relying on BBB data, such as linking back to BBB reports. The meeting concluded by thanking Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Shipman for participating, and for the innovative spirit and investment they have put into TrustLink. Before the meeting outlined above started, the BOC shared its concerns with Mr. Mitchell. If any other third party company
was
doing what Trustlink was doing with the BBB name, membership lists,
Brand, Reports, ODR, etc., the system would be asking CBBB to get it
legally shut down because of using the BBB's resources for someone
else's for-profit company. Because a BBB is doing this, it comes under
the domain of the BOC. The biggest concern for some of us is that this
decision to use BBB resources on an innovative project was done in
order to create a separate corporation that could easily compete with
the BBB.
For all intent and purposes, according to tax records, the Los Angeles Better Business Bureau and Mr. William Mitchell are virtually one and the same. Therefore, it would appear Mr. Mitchell (and possibly the other members of the Caliber BBB Gang of Five) are engaged in TrustLink to make money off of their relationship and control of the five Caliber BBB branches. Even the Better Business Bureau began to notice the aroma of conflict of interest on this one as the minutes from a follow up BOC meeting in September of 2008 indicate. BOC meeting minutes Teleconference August 19, 2008 BOC members participating – Sheryl Bilbrey, Chair, Kevin Sanders, Beverly Baskin, Rick Brinkley, Linda Carmody. Don MacKinnon represented the Canadian BBBs. CBBB staff included Nora Carpenter and Dave Johnson. TrustLink The BOC met and discussed its recent teleconference with Bill Mitchell and Jerry Shipman as well as additional information the Caliber BBBs submitted relative to the proposed innovative test of the TrustLink program. The Committee noted the program, as proposed, would create a separate brand and be operated by a separate for-profit corporation. This would set an unacceptable precedent. At the same time the BOC found aspects of the proposed program worthy of testing. The current innovative test policy states that with proper notice a test may proceed unless the CBBB Executive Committee or Board acts to prevent the test. Accordingly, the BOC resolved that it would not be inclined to request the CBBB Board block the Innovative Test provided that the Caliber BBBs met the following conditions: - The proposed
program must be operated by the BBB(s). It cannot be operated by a
third party corporation due to the potential it has to
directly affect the BBB brand.
- The program may have a separate name (e.g., TrustLink) but it must be BBB branded consistent with the brand style guide. The CBBB Capacity Team can assist. - The reliability reports may be enhanced to include elements deriving from the program. But the reliability reports must otherwise reflect the required formatting and language of the "ratings" reports, once these are approved for use by the BBB system. The Committee on Reports will help ensure the enhancements meet the spirit of the reporting requirements (e.g., via additional section headings, etc.). BOC meeting minutes Monthly Teleconference September 3, 2008 BOC members participating – Sheryl Bilbrey, Chair, Kevin Sanders, Beverly Baskin, and Rick Brinkley. Don MacKinnon represented the Canadian BBBs. CBBB staff included Steve Cole, Alan Cohen, Steve Salter, Dave Johnson and Dawn Young. TrustLink The BOC continued its discussion of the TrustLink program. It considered whether Caliber could be a successful model for the development of TrustLink, why/whether a separate corporation is necessary, and concerns presented by a competing brand to BBB. To continue to seek resolution, Steve Cole offered to ask incoming CBBB Board Chair Pete Blackshaw to sit down with the BOC and TrustLink BBBs to explore options. The meeting is scheduled to be held during the San Francisco Assembly. BOC meeting minutes In-person meeting, Clearwater FL January 21-22, 2009 BOC members participating – Beverly Baskin, Chair, BBB Raleigh; Jane Driggs, BBB Salt Lake City; Carrie Hurt, Austin TX BBB; Bob Shomphe, Concord NH BBB; and Linda Carmody, BBB Indianapolis. Don MacKinnon, BBB Halifax, represented the Canadian BBBs by phone for part of the meeting. CBBB staff included Nora Carpenter, Steve Salter, Dave Johnson and, by telephone for parts of the meeting, Steve Cole, Alan Cohen and Chris Garver. TrustLink The BOC reviewed the report submitted by the Caliber BBBs on the TrustLink program (www.trustlink.org). The report provided the numbers of business profiles, consumer profiles and recommendations/reviews added in recent months. The BOC will request that this data be provided for the life of the program in future reports, as well as month-by-month. It will also seek a list of new features and program changes with each report, as TrustLink continues to grow and evolve. The next TrustLink update is due at the end of January. BOC meeting minutes In-person meeting, Arlington VA March 31, 2009 BOC members participating – Beverly Baskin, Chair, BBB Raleigh, NC; Jane Driggs, BBB Salt Lake City, UT; Carrie Hurt, BBB Austin, TX; Bob Shomphe, BBB Concord, NH; and Linda Carmody, BBB Indianapolis, IN. Don MacKinnon, BBB Halifax, NS represented the Canadian BBBs. CBBB staff included Nora Carpenter, Steve Salter, Dave Johnson and, for parts of the meeting, Steve Cole and Alan Cohen. TrustLink After reviewing a report submitted by the TrustLink BBBs, BOC sought clarification of three things: a. Is TrustLink driving traffic
to the BBB, or vice versa?
b. How many current TrustLink accounts are there? c. Are there any revenue development plans or prospects for TrustLink? TrustLink leaves an interesting trail of money, ambition and the use of not-for-profit entities for potential personal gain. TrustLink points out severe flaws in the BBB grading algorithm. It's enough to make one question why anyone needs the Better Business Bureau. |
|
|
|
| Editor's note: Neither I or this website have a problem with the Better Business Bureau. Indeed, there is a need for a consumer advocacy group that the public can turn to, and in most cases, the Better Business Bureau fulfills this role adequately. What we do have a problem with is the BBB's "A-F" grading system. It is demonstratively biased, based on hearsay, weighted in favor of dues paying members and offers no recourse when the BBB makes an error. It is obvious the Better Business Bureau does not now, nor ever will have, the resources to fully investigate the four million businesses in their database, much less grade them with any sense of accuracy. It's an impossible job, and to think otherwise is a mistake that the BBB should acknowledge so they can get back to their reason for existence--protecting the consumer. There's an old saying, "who will watch the watchers" and it applies here as the BBB has set themselves up to be above the law. We are simply here to help the Better Business Bureau do a better job so that they may properly serve the consumer, the business community and themselves. | |
| ©
2009 bbbroundup.com. all rights reserved. |
|