In the world of Mary Kay, the rules only apply some times to some people. And there's not always rhyme or reason to how the rules are applied either. Maybe you're in. Maybe you're out. Who knows.
And can you believe the people at corporate? Nope. Your actual results depend upon who you talk to, what they say, and whether or not corporate later denies that was said.
Take, for instance, the story of this director. The director's unit was struggling. They'd make production. Then miss it. And sometimes they'd miss production two months in a row. Well the official "rule" on this from Mary Kay is that you can miss production two months in a row – ONCE.
Unless they decide not to follow the rule. Then you're allowed to do that twice. Or three times. Or who knows how many times.
But imagine being this director and missing two months in a row for the fourth time. You get a letter from Mary Kay Inc. telling you that your directorship is being terminated. And you accept that, because frankly, it's just not worth the struggle anymore.
You would have taken another grace period if it had been offered to you. But it wasn't. You're being terminated as of the end of this month. And so you act accordingly… you tell your unit that this is the end of the road. You don't do any inventory frontloading talks. You don't work on recruiting. You don't have any wonderful contests for your unit. You accept that this is the end.
And then at the end of the month you receive a call from Mary Kay. It's all a mistake. You are still a director. You still have your unit. We shouldn't have sent you that termination letter because we meant to give you one more chance.
Are you kidding me? You're telling me this after the month is almost over?
Let's get over this idea that directors "step down." They don't. They're terminated. At the discretion of the company (or not). Directors don't "choose" to leave directorship. It is chosen for them.
Can we even trust Mary Kay anymore? Are the words of the executives even worth anything?