How sad. How very, very sad! Disgraceful, actually. Another woman has been attacked because of sheer negligence – and there’s no other word for it! The organization – a multi-national, no less – still promises, among other things, the safety of its customers.

On its slick website, the picture representing ‘safety’ shows a child in a cab… That is not just misleading advertising, but scary as hell! The CEO’s message after the incident – clearly professionally crafted – does two things: One, it calls the driver a perpetrator. Two, it implies that the Indian government’s licensing programs have gaps.

While both are true, nowhere are they either accepting or apologizing for the gaps in their own system! How arrogant!

Whoever the individual, whichever the licensing body, neither takes away an organization’s responsibility towards customer safety. Do these guys seriously expect to quietly pass the buck? And it isn’t the first time. They’ve faced flack in many countries before. Surely they would have learnt a few things to incorporate in their operations in other markets! But no. They chose to rely on their disruptive – it’s the 21st century word for the old “New, improved, with perfume” phrase that described a game-changer – app-enabled booking system.

There’s no doubt about it, prima facie, their offering is a game-changer. The concept, the advertising, the booking process, money collection process – all the ‘front-of-the-house’ processes are indeed wonderful. They certainly disrupt the old methods of calling for transport. To the extent that a few existing players did a copycat to stay abreast with their new competitor.

Clearly, the failure happened at the delivery end.

Y’see, unlike booking, delivery sits in the ‘operations’ part of the business. An area that needs to be awake 24x7. This is also the area that is expected to ensure safety, compliance, efficiency. After a few cursory, ostensibly compliant checks, the rest was left to technology – and a relatively new technology at that. A disaster was waiting to happen – and it happened!

In a post facto attempt to bolt the stable doors, State governments, one after another set up bans. Social Media was – still is – awash with opinions. A single incident, just one, is enough to bring the gates down on an otherwise novel idea. Which is fine because even though the idea – and the intention – was good, the product had not been fully thought through. And an innocent customer will bear the pain for the rest of her life.

Here are five things that anyone with a disruptive offering needs to consider before getting into execution mode:

Delivery is part of the Product: The novelty of the idea should begin at the delivery end. Slick selling isn’t enough. Promises have to be delivered too. Delivery processes that talk to the customer’s need have to be joined at the hip to the selling processes.

Compliance is half law and half common sense: The Law cannot be expected to cover every nuance of every business. Neither can the police. Product designers must also include common sense in their thought processes. It’s also often referred to as the ‘spirit of the law’.

Customer safety is non-negotiable: This is obvious and negligent organizations need to be severely reprimanded if they fool around with customer safety. Irrespective of what local laws may say – or not say. Listing safety is not enough, it should reflect in every aspect of the product – from booking to delivery.

The cookie-cutter is a vintage tool: Every market has its own unique nuances. While global ‘models’ are all very well, local market realities must be considered. In this world of customization, cookie cutter solutions are less than optimal and unsustainable. McDonald’s changed its model for India by keeping beef and pork products off its menu. It meant sacrificing some of their global best selling products. But they made the change. So did many others.

If technology was perfect, it would be god: While technology has its benefits, it is still evolving. Overdependence on technology is as unacceptable as a resistance to it. Nothing’s perfect, except god. So somewhere there needs to be a human intervention and back-up.

Hopefully, Uber will reconsider. But they first have to accept direct – not vicarious – responsibility for the gaps in their own processes and find solid solutions, even if it means changing their global model. Then they have to compensate their customer for the trauma – and the expense – she is being out through for using their service. The government should do its part to enforce it.

Alternatively, Uber should pack its bags and become another case study on what disruption is not.

And we must hang our head in shame. Sad. Very sad.