English: Apple I at the Smithsonian Museum (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Yesterday I wrote a short piece about the continuing reputation gaffes of Apple Inc. My point, in essence, was simple. Apple's reputation is suffering over and over because the company has lost the knack of managing it.
This time it was over the wording of a public apology to Samsung. A few readers complained that I was being shrill and that Apple was right not to comply fully with a UK court order.
That sounds like poor advice to a company that is heavily reliant on litigation. So what is the logic of that argument?
From Mangy Dog: Please … the judge’s order is perhaps the least professional thing I’ve seen in a long time. Fact is, Apple did not print anything untrue. It provided broader context by citing other rulings that happened to make the judge appear look silly. Not Apple’s fault he behaved so foolishly.
And from Hopeisconstant: I don’t think you see the forest from the trees. Faulty thinking. Most of us could care less about an infantile apology forced upon Apple by an equally infantile and obviously pompous UK judge. Apple arrogant?? Duh…from my vantage point it’s the judge that’s arrogant 3X and not too bright either.
And from Eric Brady: There is a huge readership following any Apple business story. Lately too many authors are writing to an extreme to get more readers, ($ from advertisers for view counts) this is a prime example of over the top writing. I would have to believe few here thought Apple would comply with the UK court order in full compliance, I certainly didn’t.
So who is right? Apple or the appeal court judges? I ask the question because I guess Apple executives would have been saying some of these same things, like let's see if we can comply without actually acknowledging fault.
But to take this line is to misunderstand a critical management issue. Managing Apple's reputation is as important as managing its supply chain. And Apple's name keeps going into the press in a negative light.
And there is a second issue. Apple is using litigation as a strategy to protect often slim claims to intellectual property. To do that successfully it needs the sympathy of the courts.
On both counts Apple is making poor judgments. This issue would be behind them now if they had complied fully straight away. And now they seem as though they want to challenge the UK judiciary, which at its worst can be a vindictive clique.
It might be emotionally satisfying to poke a finger at them but it's not good management.
