Handle Vendors Who Don’t Keep Their Word

When a vendor breaks a commitment, I start with the gap between what he told me and what happened. Depending on the situation, I may address a small problem once and make my expectations clear. If the same pattern continues, I have to decide whether I want to keep doing business with him.

In this discussion, I describe two vendor problems I was dealing with at the time. One involved people missing agreed arrival times and delaying a project. The other involved inferior materials and repeated promises to resolve the issue. Both required a direct conversation about an agreement that wasn't being kept.

Separate the broken commitment from the grudge

The discussion begins with a question about forgiveness and disappointment in other people. My answer is that holding a grudge occupies space in my head without giving me anything useful in return. I don't want to keep paying that cost.

I still remember how someone has behaved. If a person breaks his word, that becomes information I use when deciding whether to work with him again.

For something relatively minor, I describe addressing the difference directly: this is what you told me, this is what happened, and I don't want that gap repeated. I want a firm commitment to mean what the person said it meant.

“If you tell me something to make a firm commitment that's what we're gonna do.”

If I see the same gap again, I don't want to keep dealing with that person. I can stop carrying anger about the situation and still decide that the working relationship shouldn't continue.

Use the specific sequence of events

My first example concerns two people who came to work on a project on a Monday. They said they would return the following day, but they didn't show up. I called that afternoon to find out where they were.

They then committed to coming before nine the next morning and said they had cleared the day for the job. The following morning, they changed the time again. They arrived around eleven, later than the revised time as well.

When one of them told me they wouldn't finish that day, I went back through the commitments. They had already missed the previous day. They had arrived late again. Now they were telling me the work would take another visit.

I told them that I expected the project completed that day. Other people would be working there into the evening, and I would return after my meetings. I gave them the alternative of leaving so I could find somebody else to finish.

The sequence mattered to my response. I was dealing with repeated changes to a commitment, and I described those changes specifically. A further promise about a future visit had less credibility because of what had already happened.

At the time of the recording, I hadn't yet returned to see the final result. I said I would find out after my meetings. The account explains the conversation I had with them; it doesn't establish that they completed the job.

Decide what conduct you want around the rest of your team

I want to work with people who show up and keep their word. I also think about what happens to the people around me when I accept repeated broken commitments from someone else.

In the discussion, I say that tolerating that behavior can encourage more of it. People who have been loyal and reliable see the standard I'm willing to accept. That matters to the working environment I want to build.

My approach to choosing the people around my business includes their conduct once work begins. A useful relationship requires trust in what the other person says he will do.

I may decide to keep a very limited, distant transactional relationship with somebody after a problem. That doesn't mean I want to rely on him for more work. I can choose the extent of a relationship based on what I've experienced.

Keep the product problem clear when communication breaks down

The second example involved a supplier sending materials below the quality I was supposed to receive. This was my third transaction with the company. The first two were good experiences and the third was a substantial order, worth more than $30,000.

I had already unboxed the items and used some where they could still produce an acceptable result. That didn't resolve the quality problem with the rest of the order.

I spoke with the sales representative, a manager, and another level of management. I was asking for the correct materials. People said they would call me the following day, then failed to make the call.

At one point, I followed up by email after another promised call didn't happen. I received a late-night reply promising contact the next day. Again, I didn't get the call.

The materials and the communication were now two problems in the same relationship. I still needed the supplier to address what had been delivered. Each unfulfilled promise about contacting me gave me another reason to question how the company was handling it.

I also spoke with the company's engineer, who acknowledged the quality difference. Management then accepted that the materials weren't of the quality originally expected.

Say what resolution you're asking for

When I finally had the conversation about a resolution, the supplier wanted me to send the defective materials back before receiving replacements. I said I wasn't going to repackage dozens of items and arrange shipping after already dealing with the problems.

I asked for a full credit for the inferior items. I explained that I could order more from the company when it had the right materials available. The representative offered a partial credit, and I repeated that I wanted the full amount credited for the affected products.

My explanation stayed tied to the transaction. The company had sent the wrong quality of product. My project had been delayed. I had spent time pursuing the issue and waiting for promised responses.

I also offered a way for the company to recover the items. If it wanted them back, it could arrange to collect and pack them. I said I would store them until that happened.

Before that conversation, I had spoken to an attorney because the size of the transaction made it worth examining. In the discussion, I explain that I didn't want an endless sequence of calls arguing about a contract. That was part of my handling of this particular dispute.

The agreement reached on the call was a full credit for the affected materials. During the recording, I checked for the confirmation email and found it. Later in the discussion, the exact amount read from that email was $15,696.20.

That amount was a credit with the supplier. It wasn't a cash payment or new revenue. I had money tied up in materials that hadn't met the agreed standard, and the credit addressed those items.

Be willing to have the uncomfortable conversation

The call that produced the credit lasted seventeen minutes. By that point, I had already spent weeks trying to get the issue resolved. The phone conversation was one part of a longer problem, and it finally produced a written confirmation.

An audience member thanked me for discussing the contractors and the lessons in negotiating and setting expectations. I responded that the point of telling the story was to pay attention to the conversation and use the lessons.

A direct conversation can feel uncomfortable. In this case, I stayed focused on what the supplier had provided, what had been promised, and the resolution I was asking for. I was willing to remain in that conversation until we addressed the issue.

I prefer to make expectations clear before the work starts. Once somebody has failed to meet them, I still need to say exactly where the gap is and decide whether I can trust the next commitment.

I end the broader discussion by telling people to keep working and improving their own lives. I don't want to spend my attention on punishing somebody for being unreliable. I want to resolve what I can, decide whom I'll work with, and move forward with people whose word I can trust.