Ordering on Behalf of a Consultant
Did you know that Mary Kay has rules about orders placed by a DIQ or sales director on behalf of a Mary Kay consultant?
As we know, it is commonplace for DIQs and directors to sign up consultants (sometimes even without their knowledge), possibly pay for their starter kit, and sometimes purchase products in their names. This is done to meet production goals, qualify for cars, or win various contests that require a certain number of recruits and/or a certain amount of product orders.
Mary Kay has rules against this, but we all know how laughable this is. Orders are placed in others’ names ALL THE TIME, and nothing is ever done about it. Why should Mary Kay put a stop to it? It brings in millions of dollars a year. Nonetheless, they have to make it LOOK like they disapprove of it. Here are the rules as stated in the Advance brochure:
- In the event anyone places an order for a Starter Kit and/or product on behalf of a Beauty Consultant, the following applies:
- The person placing the order must have the Beauty Consultant’s consent prior to placing the order;
- The person placing the order must use the Beauty Consultant’s funds; and
- The person placing the order must be in possession of the Beauty Consultant’s funds prior to placing the order.
- Taking a postdated check and placing an order for a Beauty Consultant will not count.
- A Beauty Consultant selling anyone’s inventory other than her own, then placing an order, will not count.
- The DIQ cannot sell her inventory to a Beauty Consultant and take her/his money to place an order to replace the DIQ’s inventory.
- If the DIQ uses her credit card to pay for a Beauty Consultant’s order, the DIQ must have already received the cash from the Beauty Consultant before the order is mailed, phoned in or placed online.
- The DIQ cannot place an order for a Beauty Consultant with her promise to pay the DIQ back.
How often did you see these rules violated when you were in Mary Kay?
Visit the
The rules are at odds with the incentives. There are rewards associated with breaking these rules, for MKC as well as the sales force.
A few simple changes to the incentive structure would stop this behavior in its tracks. It appears MyShop attempts to do this. But until they shut down the legacy channel, this type of thing will continue.
Imagine if commissions were paid only for true retail purchases made by folks outside the downline, with no bonus or commission on orders made by the sales force? That would all but eliminate front-loading.
This is why MyShop is such a gamble. Can Mary Kay Corp really survive without all the revenue associated with front-loading? And what about upline commissions? How much will those drop absent front-loading?
Oh to know the true breakdown of orders vs. sales that end up in the hands of outside, paying customers. Any guesses?
Rules without consequences might as well not exist.
This is nothing but a smokescreen designed to make them look like they’re complying with FTC rules. In reality, corporate doesn’t care what anyone does as long as that sweet, sweet inventory money keeps rolling in.
Been there, done that, got the tee-shirt.
I went through the DIQ process at least 3 times before I succeeded. Then I learned that “find a way, make a way” meant recruiting imaginary consultants, and activating inactive consultants with my own money.
My last minute “miracle” to finish DIQ involved me recruiting my mom and sister and activating them with my own funds. I also activated 3 other inactive team members with my own funds. I did all of this with permission from the individuals, and I had everything shipped to them so it wouldn’t arouse suspicion. I hadn’t yet learned that MK Inc didn’t actually care about this behavior, and, in fact, encourages it.
I don’t know a single director who completed DIQ without doing this. And I know many less scrupulous directors who didn’t ask permission before placing the orders.