I was hearing a debate today about various people who are essentially in the business of giving advice to others where the goal is to help the client turn things around in life. This involved professions such as a financial adviser. The funny thing was one guy was saying that since he has disposable income he actually kept using a person’s service even if it seemed like the provider wasn’t really knowledgeable about it as an experiment to see how honest they were. Afterwards, he would use this information to create a report of sorts to warn others.
In many ways, it’s almost like being a news reporter except you are using your own money and resources to investigate into a company. It’s almost like saying, if you went to a restaurant that was clearly giving bad service would you actually go through the whole experience as a way to verify its quality or would you simply leave? Like in this case, the guy would stay.
Or imagine like going to a store with a commissioned salesmen where you know for a fact that everything he is telling you is simply a way to buy more things that you don’t need so that they get more money. Although they make it sound like it is a necessity. Would you be inclined to just say yes to everything to confirm that he/she was dishonest? Funny enough, I think for myself when it comes to non-tangible services I usually tend to go through the entire experience otherwise I second guess the motive and integrity of a company. This makes it clearer.
So I can’t say it’s completely strange to continue to pay for bad service as an example as sometimes verifying one’s integrity will probably save you and others even more in the long run.