No. The most effective companies in the world are the ones with the fastest feedback loops, and in the absence of directly measuring customer use of the product, sharing searchable records of defects is the best way to accomplish this.
This is particularly the case in services companies like software. We will not only collect written defect reports but we circulate them in real time throughout the company so that issues can be fixed as fast as possible. At any good SaaS company, the Zendesk tickets, Salesforce records, and recorded customer calls from tools like Gong are often funneled directly into Slack or email alerts for anyone to see without even having to go search for them.
Tesla insisting on unrecorded verbal communication is a shady practice only mirrored by con artists, HR hacks, and bloodsucking lawyers.
Sure, but Tesla is concerned with leaks becoming PR disasters for every little issue with their cars. Can't say I blame them, giving the routine unwarranted panic it generates.
I doubt your company is making that data public.
So? Yes, you fucked up big time and you don't want the public to know. That's PR 101.
> Trying to hide the issues rather than prevent or fix them won't save them.
Where did you get it that they are not trying to prevent the issues?
Tesla insisting on unrecorded verbal communication for specific circumstances is not uncommon at all. Often it's at the direct instruction of their legal counsel. You're just not aware of it, because it's secret (and protected by NDAs and an army of lawyers), and thus assume it's uncommon.
Corporate unethical bullshit is an iceberg. You will never see the vast majority of it.
Secondarily, well-run public companies do not focus their teams on the share price in the short term. They focus on long term growth that compounds from strategic thinking and focused execution, not chasing stock price that can go up or down randomly based on conditions out of their control.
This not a question of finding it so, the same way it is not a way of "finding" the speed limit on a certain stretch of road.
And those retention policies are there to preserve records for the potential of future law suits. The absence of records that actually should be there doesn't do any service turing a trial or other dispute. Quite the opposite, usuall, it is assumed those records were deleted for the very reason ypu stated, meaning the company doing it almost guilty from the get go.
Funny how you have the facts almost right, but everythong else backwards.
Have you never heard of a data retention policy? Every company has them. They exist to delete records that could be used in a lawsuit or by a whistleblower. They tend to find whatever the regulatory maximum is and put their limit at a little past that.