I currently work at an indoor trampoline park as an office assistant, where I learn about what’s going on within the company firsthand. One of the big issues with the type of industry that I work for is liability. Of course with any physical activity comes the risk of injury if done improperly or with negligence. There have been stories on the news about lawsuits arising with people getting hurt at these trampoline parks. One of the rules of the company I work for is that all jumpers must either jump barefoot (no socks) or with laced up shoes. A lot of parents and even kids that have called or come in always question why they can’t wear socks but can wear shoes. The answer is socks are slippery when jumping and that can create a greater risk for our jumpers—while jumping barefoot or with shoes eliminates slipping while jumping. However, last month my company started advertising a new product in all their stores (west coast to Midwest) that would end all our customer’s concerns about jumping barefoot or with shoes. They are introducing socks with grips on the bottom. Customers now have the choice to jump with these socks that they can only buy from us or still jump barefoot.
The actual product has not launched in all the stores yet. I was told that they were going to do trial runs in some of the stores on the west coast. While this idea of these new socks may sound like a great idea, being a business student who would like to potentially open up my own business, my concern was again with liability. These socks may sound like a great idea but I questioned my general manager of what would happen if someone got hurt while wearing the company’s exclusive socks. As far as I know the company’s liability waiver is not going to be changed, which if this is true wouldn’t be the smartest choice on the owner of the company’s part.
I connected this story with what we learned in class about project characteristics. The characteristics consist of cost, time, and performance objectives/planning. The time and cost of the project is not what’s going to make this product fail, I think that the planning is. There are a lot of elements with putting a new product out on the market when you’re in this type of industry. Liability is the main one that I would be worried about. If I were the project manager I would have spent more time planning and figuring the pros and cons of the product instead of how much profit the company is going to make off it.
You make a very good point about how introducing these new “no slip grip” socks would create an even bigger liability for the company you work for. While the initial response of most people would be to acknowledge this as a great solution to customers who would prefer to just wear socks when jumping on the trampolines, you’ve looked deeper into this issue. Not only should the project managers have spent more time planning for this product and possibly reflecting this new change in the liability waiver, but it is also important to test the product for any flaws. As with any socks, these new socks may move or change position while the person is wearing them, creating the risk that they may twist enough for the smooth side to move to the bottom of the foot. As a child I had a few pairs socks similar to these with grips on the bottoms. They worked well on the wooden floors we had in my house, but they were known to twist while wearing them, causing every surface to be much more slippery.
It would be wise to speak to the general manager more on this subject to show him/her how these new socks could create an even larger issue for the company. Unfortunately, many businesses focus too much on profit and how they can raise revenues instead of the harsh consequences that come with each decision they make.
I agree with you that the planning of the product was executed poorly. In my opinion, the company decided that cost was actually the most important factor when it came to safety. As such, they created a low cost solution (grip-socks) instead of fixing the actual problem; the slippery and sometimes unsafe trampolines.
While I do believe that the company is heading in the right direction because they are concerned about their customers’ safety, the planning of improving safety through new socks will just not hit the mark.
Although you pose a great concern for these new socks causing a bigger liability for the company you work for, I do not believe the liability waiver should have to be altered. As you mentioned before, with any physical activity being performed comes the risk of injury. Currently, the policy is to jump with shoes or go barefoot; however, one can still get injured while jumping with shoes or barefoot. So, with the creation of these new “grip” socks, I do not believe your company is going to be doing major harm to itself. Your company is simply trying to be innovative and offer the customers an alternative to wearing shoes or going barefoot; since many customers already seem to take interest in jumping with socks on. Hopefully, your company does a good job at analyzing the trial runs and are able to improve on the quality/performance of the new socks, if need be.
First of all, let me say I am a big fan of the trampoline warehouses such as the one you work at. I am a former gymnast and really admire all of the ways trampolines are put to use there, such as for dodge ball and alongside foam pits. My main interest in your post is the fact that you say your company is developing these “socks with tread” in order to give customers another alternative to being barefoot or having to wear shoes. Instead of developing their own product, your company could have decided to sell slip on gymnastics shoes. These shoes resemble socks more than shoes and they already provide the non-slip dynamic that you are looking for. These shoes have been around for a long time and are the standard in the gymnastics industry and would serve your trampoline business perfectly. I feel that had your company purchased these slip-on shoes instead of developing your own product it would have eliminated the costs associated with launching a new product, and could have been available much quicker. A final note is that it also could have reduced your liability, which you seem to be worried about since these shoes are the industry standard and have been around long enough to know they work.
I agree with the statements above. cmandoza makes a valid point that the company is in fact headed in the right direction with putting the consumers safety first. However, they really have not done in the greatest way that they can.
A lot can go wrong with a product, I think we can all agree on this even if we have not been on the production side of something. And in America, this can pose a big problem to a company because people are not afraid to sue a company. I would advise a company such as yours to maybe contact an outside vendor to maybe test their socks to see how they work out. Like jkundrat said above, there are other options such as slip on gymnastic shoes, items that have proven that they work.
Maybe suggesting to your company to reach out to other similar services and figure out what they use and allow in the jumping/ play area would be a benefit to the company. If they are going to concern themselves with the safety of their customers, especially since they are children, they should look into it more and develop different options before jumping into the one idea.
Thanks for the post. The potential for the idea is there in theory for the trampoline company/store. It seems there are two options when considering the ‘no slip sock’ innovation. First, continue the no sock policy and have a few customers peeved. Second, launch this questionable sock alternative that could backfire; which may ruin their credibility and reputation as a safe establishment. (Also, the waiver terms should clearly state that the company is not liable for selling/using the specific socks, etc…)
In business there are always trade-offs. Are customers deciding not to use the trampoline facility because they cannot wear socks? If yes, then the new socks may be a worthwhile pursuit. But it depends on the severity of the loss of business.
From the perspective of a cost-benefit analysis, will the socks attract more participants, build the customer base, and raise margins? If it does backfire, was it worth it if the only main purpose was to satisfy some people because they ‘preferred’ to wear socks? Is the risk worth the return?
As the type of business with significant liability risks, anything that may jeopardize the safety of individuals should be considered very carefully and legal issues must be addressed first.
I have recently visited one of these “trampoline warehouses” in Niles called Sky High Sports. I can see your concerns you have about the new product and I kind of agree with f1212dgarcia. It is clear that your company wants to satisfy their customers by giving them the option of jumping in socks. But instead of allowing your customers to jump in their own socks which can increase the risk of injury, your company saw an opportunity to increase their revenue. I don’t think these socks are such a bad idea. These types of socks are available to patients in hospital and elderly people for safety reasons, and from what I know, they are effective. As long as the company doesn’t advertise them as a way to prevent injury I don’t think your liability policy should be changed because there is still the same risk of injury with these socks. As I said it just gives the person the option of jumping with socks with a little added benefit.
I understand your concern about the safety of your clients and the liability that your company would face with this new product. However, i’m not exactly certain how this could make your company’s liability waiver outdated. The essence of the sock would be just an alternative option to being barefoot for parents who would be concerned with their children running around. This might even attract new customers so could be be beneficial to the business and even give you an edge over competitors if they are a success in their trials. I do understand the concern with the slipperiness but if these have a grip on the bottom the danger would be theoretically equivalent to that of being barefoot or having shoes on as being negligent and doing things wrong are always a danger. What they need to do now is dedicate the appropriate time on these trials and if the cost works in their favor work upon distributing these socks.