With the announced change to Amway and a non-negotiable stance from Quixtar/Amway management I knew I was in a moral dilemma. I had major issues with the Quixtar transformation including:
First, I had spoken on stage all across the
Second, I was already struggling morally with building the Quixtar business because of the lack of progress for the new people. Instead of moving the ball forward we were now:
A. Phasing out Team Approach with new stacking rule.
B. Focusing on retailing products.
C. Handing over the training of Ibo’s to Amway.
D. Phasing out curiosity approach and leading with Amway/Quixtar.
E. Less money in the plan for all utilizing the Team Approach.
Without Team Approach and the Curiosity Approach, I am personally convinced the business will not move forward. How can I continue to make money from a success training system, when I believe in my heart that others will not get the results that I did?
Third, the rejection of the wishes of the vast majority of the Quixtar Ibo’s made me realize I did not truly run my own business. The term IBO is a misnomer in my opinion. In order to own your own business, you must be able to make choices freely on what to do with your personal property. In business, this includes naming it, selling it, how to build it, or exiting it. Otherwise, you are not an owner, but more of an employee - without the employee benefits, in my opinion. I could not represent this as someone’s independent business, if it did not have the true benefits of ownership. This was another moral issue to me.
Fourth, the data management rule, non-compete rule, and non-solicitation rule were being applied in ways that were never agreed upon by the board. According to Don Wilson, Fred Harteis, and Billy Florence the company had twisted the original interpretations. The arbitration rules should be used to force bankruptcy on anyone at the discretion of the company. There must be checks and balances. Checks and balances in any business or government are critical to reign in fallen human nature. This is how our Constitution is set up with checks and balances between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. I saw first hand how these rules were being enforced at Quixtar and it concerned me greatly. In my opinion, the above rules were being used to build a wall around the Ibo’s to force them to stay involved under fear of reprisal. For example when I was threatened with a suspension, my only recourse would be to enter a costly arbitration process. I attempted to explain this to the other board members, but most only focused on the specific issue - not the underlying principles. To me, if the riverbed is set up wrong - we have to assume the water will go with the riverbed. I attempted to get the board united around changing the riverbed - to ensure the people owned their own businesses. Coercion is a poor principle for any leader to utilize. What type of loyalty is engendered by walls, threats and intimidation? How could I knowingly bring others inside of the walls? This was another moral issue to me.
Many people on the Board called the families a benevolent dictatorship. They meant this in a good sense, being that they always took care of the people. I believe they did their best in taking care of the people before the riverbed changed. I believe in 2004, there was a major change in the riverbed that guides the water. This was the year the LOS became the confidential trade secret information of Quixtar’s. When renewals were automatically processed in 2004 - they included a clause that from my vantage point, gave away the ownership of your groups to Quixtar. Remember, the right to own property is the absolute necessity in order to have a free enterprise system. No one will improve a piece of land into a crop producing field if it can be taken away at the discretion of the ruler or government. This was another major for me, because after the new rules were put in place - a gradual change occurred in the relationship between the Board and the Company. Before the new rules, if the Company did anything too out of line, the Dexter Yager's and Bill Britt's would stand up. If they weren't listened too the company knew they would lose them. This concern, is exactly what led Amway to move to the Quixtar opportunity in the first place. With the new riverbed, the Quixtar management can ignore the Board or any other large IBO leader. Quixtar does not fear losing the business, because they have built a large legal wall. To me, this is not free enterprise anymore and it changed without my knowledge - without a new signed agreement. I know that Quixtar states when I auto-renewed that it was automatically added. But something does not sit right with me in this argument. I believe that non-competes require a commensurate compensation and physical signatures to the new terms. Where is the checks and balances here?
At the special board meeting in early August, my goal was to give one last chance to convince Quixtar to change course. Many Board members believed that a name change to Amway would be catastrophic to the long-term business interest of all organizations. No change of course was pursued. In my personal organization, I estimated that I had less than 100 people that had ever been in Amway. To force them back into a business that they have never been in before is a bait and switch maneuver, in my opinion. I asked the lawyers to tell me my options - they cringed at the wording placed in the contract, without our consent or permission. They stated that Quixtar was attempting to make it nearly impossible for someone to leave their business with their friends. If Quixtar assumes the LOS is the people and not just a customer list, then the people are the trade secret. How can the people be a trade secret? The whole issue boiled down to who owns the people? There are three possible answers:
1. Quixtar owns them.
2. The upline owns them.
3. No one owns them because they are truly Independent Business Owners.
I vote for option number three. I did not prepare a lawsuit against Quixtar to hurt their business. I did not even prepare a lawsuit against Quixtar, because I wanted to break their contract. I prepared a lawsuit against Quixtar, because I was scared they would threaten to suspend me again - for bringing my concerns to their attention. I thought by having a lawsuit, they would see our resolve and negotiate an amicable settlement. Much like two countries that have atomic bombs, they are less likely to press the button when both will be hurt. I tried to bring a check and balance to the negotiating position. We needed their respect in order to negotiate fairly. If I wanted to sue them, I did not need to meet with them at all. I would have just had my lawyers file the suit. We met with Quixtar management, with the goal of negotiating a settlement. We wanted to ensure there were no lawsuits on either side moving forward. I did not want to take my whole Team with me, as I had no idea who would come or who would go. I only wanted an exact description of how to fulfill the contract and leave peaceably. I was willing to sit out the six months, but my major concern was to ensure no lawsuits in the future. That plan obviously did not go so well! If I did get suspended or terminated, my hope was that by showing the California lawsuit and having the standstill agreements - we would get back to the table and settle this as Christian men.
I still believe this is possible and pray every day for cooler heads to prevail. A legitimate settlement would help all parties involved. I am not a coward, but realize the innocent people on both sides that are being hurt. We were terminated and the Quixtar lawyers ignored our stand still agreement. We called nearly all the Quixtar management in an attempt to get back to the negotiating table. The calls were either not taken or not listened to. We were left with no choice in our opinion, but to seek judicial relief. We did not ask for damages, but merely if the contract could be enforced with the current state of the business. If it was a silly move then so be it, but I have not heard any advice from anyone on how to approach Quixtar to get a better result. To me, the issue is can a person build a big group and then leave with people who choose to leave with them? Is it really OK to terminate a business builder after 14 years of loyal service? I just wanted people to have a choice and if I erred - I did so, not by lack of character, but from ignorance on how to approach Quixtar. I apologize to everyone, for having put you through this heartache for the last 6 months. I desire peace with honor and will settle the legal disputes on any reasonable terms, so that both sides can move on with their new businesses.
With that said, we will announce our future intentions on the next post and move forward to our destiny either way! God Bless, Orrin Woodward
