Over the years, I’ve participated in hundreds of conversations about Amazon performance. Some took place while I was at Amazon managing vendor relationships. Others happened later while advising manufacturers responsible for growing and operating their Amazon business.
The details were always different.
One company was frustrated by declining sales. Another was concerned about profitability. A third was struggling with inventory instability, advertising performance, or a difficult negotiation. The symptoms varied considerably, but over time I began noticing a pattern.
Amazon was frequently blamed for problems it did not create. What Amazon often did create was visibility.
That distinction may seem subtle, but I’ve found it changes how leaders approach diagnosis and decision-making. When performance deteriorates, the natural instinct is to focus on the place where the problem becomes visible. If inventory is unstable, perhaps Amazon’s forecasting has changed. If margins are under pressure, perhaps pricing needs adjustment. If growth slows, perhaps advertising is underperforming.
Sometimes those explanations are correct. What I’ve found, however, is that many Amazon problems originate somewhere else.
I’ve worked with organizations where nobody could clearly identify who owned the channel. I’ve seen businesses where important decisions required alignment across so many stakeholders that execution slowed considerably. I’ve watched teams spend weeks discussing tactics without first agreeing on the objective those tactics were intended to support. In each case, the symptoms appeared on Amazon, but the conditions that produced those symptoms existed elsewhere in the organization.
Part of what makes this dynamic difficult to recognize is that Amazon is exceptionally effective at exposing weaknesses. Inventory positions change daily. Purchase orders fluctuate. Margins are measurable. Performance data is readily available. Decisions and their consequences tend to become visible more quickly than they do in many other channels.
As a result, issues that might remain hidden elsewhere become difficult to ignore.
Several years ago, I worked with a business that had become increasingly frustrated with its Amazon performance. Sales growth had stalled. Inventory availability was inconsistent. Advertising results were disappointing. Leadership believed the business had an Amazon problem.
The response was thoughtful and well-intentioned. Additional reporting was requested. New initiatives were launched. More time and attention were directed toward the channel. Despite those efforts, performance remained largely unchanged.
The conversation became more productive once attention shifted away from Amazon itself and toward how the business was operating. There was no clear owner of the channel. Important decisions required broad consensus. Priorities changed frequently. Accountability was difficult to establish. None of those issues appeared in Vendor Central, yet each influenced what eventually appeared in Vendor Central.
As those organizational issues improved, business performance improved.
Experiences like that have made me cautious whenever Amazon is identified as the primary explanation for underperformance. There are certainly situations where Amazon is the source of the problem. Vendor relationships deteriorate. Competitive conditions change. Economics become less favorable. Those situations exist.
What I’ve found, however, is that many organizations arrive at that conclusion before examining whether Amazon is simply exposing weaknesses that already existed.
This is one reason I believe many companies don’t actually have an Amazon problem.
They have an ownership problem.
A decision-making problem.
An accountability problem.
An operating rhythm problem.
Amazon simply happens to be where those problems become visible.
The strongest vendor organizations I’ve encountered are rarely distinguished by access to tactics that others don’t understand. More often, they have greater clarity around ownership, priorities, decision-making, and execution. Those capabilities rarely attract attention because they don’t appear particularly sophisticated. Yet they influence a remarkable number of outcomes that eventually show up on scorecards, business reviews, and performance reports.
When an Amazon business begins to struggle, it is natural to search for answers inside Amazon. The platform is where the symptoms appear, and those symptoms deserve attention.
In my experience, however, some of the most productive conversations begin when leaders ask a different question.
Not “What’s wrong with Amazon?”
But rather “What is Amazon revealing about our business?”
The answer is often more useful than anything found inside Vendor Central.
