By Martin Brampton, 11 October 2005 07:00
COMMENT The reason so many of us have bad experiences with customer service has little to do with the fact so many companies are outsourcing it, says Martin Brampton. There are bigger issues at play here.
BT lambasting its customers for racial prejudice over Indian call centres makes a good story. It also distracts from the real issue about customer service, which is that in most cases it is not working. The whole question of how large organisations interface with their customers needs an overhaul.
Dissatisfaction is rife and the spread of large company attitudes into the public sector is alarming. Government is seemingly unable to grasp the point that much of the commercial sector is steadily debasing its reputation with its own customers.
The fundamental problem, as we all know, is that for all the talk of the supremacy of the customer, most large companies want to take the maximum amount of money for the minimum amount of deliverable. And customer service fails because it has little connection with achieving that minimum amount of deliverable.
For the most part, people do not contact organisations such as BT until there is a problem or a question. We are then forced to deal with a group that is clearly at arm's length from the functional areas of the organisation. The geographic separation of outsourced 'service' centres only emphasises the operational detachment that affects even UK-based centres. In the specific case of BT, only a minority of employees seem to understand the company's service offerings.
Recently, I have been having problems with an exceedingly large UK retailer that operates a supermarket chain. We used to have groceries delivered and enjoyed a good service until the retailer decided to rejig its operation and base our service on a different store. The service level plummeted. No amount of complaining made the slightest difference, most probably because there is next to no communication between customer services and the operational departments.
A couple of weeks ago, the delivery arrived early, which was acceptable but the usual printout showing missing and substituted items was not available. We were told the store's printer had failed. That seemed remarkable, as our family is better resourced than to rely on just one printer. Worse, after the driver had gone, it became apparent that several items on the till receipt were missing.
A call to customer service brought a promise of a return call. None came. Another call, and we were told there was no record of our previous call. But we were assured that customer service was taken extremely seriously and that the missing items would be refunded. We would receive an email in confirmation. No email ever arrived, nor did a refund.
A letter to customer services elicited an arrogant letter that said that we had cancelled the only order placed on the day in question. The letter implied that we, as mere customers, were obviously in a muddle. It told us that there was no record of either of our two calls - nor of any refund. The writer said that he "felt" that the 0845 numbers for stores that we had grumbled about were cheaper for many customers, when in fact they are never cheaper than any UK geographic number for anyone.
Another letter from us provided documentary evidence for our claims. All we received in reply was a very curt letter telling us that our views had been recorded. Fortunately, we still have the choice of other retailers and will be exercising that choice.
In the light of this kind of experience, it is frustrating to hear government ministers talking about the introduction of private companies into the health service. They suggest that only the most doctrinaire could be opposed to such an enlightened move, since the delivery of care will remain free. Yet this completely misses the point. Quite often, money is not the critical part of a 'customer service' issue. And I do not want my health to be at the mercy of the kind of people who think that an answer to my problem is to be told that my views have been recorded.
Maybe customers' issues do have to be filtered by something like call centre operators. But real concerns do arise, and the world is a messy place where problems often fail to fit neatly into standard scripts. Until the operational parts of organisations find ways to deal with customer problems, our frustrations will only get worse, and call centre operators will be subjected to irrational abuse.
Comments
There are 28 comments. Join the discussion
1. Charles Smith
Call centres measure their "performance" by the number of calls answered, the call queue length and the number of missed calls. There is nothing in their metrics to record whether customer was happy with the response or whether it solved the problem. External or imported call centres worsen the situation because of longer communication chains and different loyalties.
The fundamental problem of call centres is that this is dumb cost saving with the costs of supply failures shifted from the supplier to the client. This will not go away until customers shun the suppliers who have poor call centres. In the case of Government Services the public should write to their representatives - the MP's.
Call centres only exist because we let them happen.
2. Frank Smith
Well yes I agree, but they all have bad call centers for the very reasons you state.
Lets take broadband,
BT and NTL/Telewest all have the same systems in house along with AOL.
Seems funny how all these companies, in compitition with each other, use the same call center systems.
Customer service is just a cost to these companies and will go with the cheapest option every time.
We have very little choice if we need to use these services.
We just hope nothing goes wrong.
cheers
Bob
3. Paul Bouzan
I couldn't agree more with the statement regarding problems that do not fit into standard scripts. I wont even get started on what I think of BT and their complete inability to do anything other than sound nice on the phone. Even worse, try getting your point across to Orange Customer Services about the shockingly inadequate firmware loaded onto the Nokia 6680. Then, once the Technical Support Department have a shot at resolving it, they tell me they 'made a test call and it rang'. To this they close the call and have the poor 1st line support girl try and convince me they have fixed the problem. By the way, Orange's technical support department are no longer customer-facing, that is the official line from them. I'm sorry by the nomination for monumentally poor customer services is always going to be the telcoms boys!
4. Laurence Cook
Couldn't agree more. We recently had problems with both our business and telephone lines, the business line being down three times in a week. Reporting the fault to BT was easy, web based and by telephone. However, getiing updates was like pulling teeth. The call centre staff could merely say that the fault was being worked on. When the engineers arrived to fix the fault, they were efficiency itself. The web site was never updated, stating that the fault would soon be allocated when it had been fixed.
I complained (twice) to BT and have been promised compensation of £34.00.
5. anonymous
I think this is a common experience for many of us, but why you're so coy about explicitly naming the retailer?
6. Gill Wildman
Few companies ever look at their whole service from the custoimers point of view, and as a result scratch anyone who buys anything and you'll find stories like this. When will companies start to actually design their services from the customer's point of view? If churn is expensive, and automated solutions are failing, you are missing something significant. The alternative is designing a service by default, full of holes and misunderstandings, for which you can't always blame the customer!
7. Jon Strong
I agree the problem is as described a general one arising, in my view, from a complete failure to understand things from the customer's perspective.
There is often an assumption in the first instance that the customer's expectation or complaint is unreasonable and that the corporate or, director's "ego" is to be maintained.
I'm experience a similar issue currently it has inspired me to consider a new concept -
"Ego-nomics" when the cost of customer service actions in defence of the company outweigh the economic cost of resolving a customer's justifiable complaint.
8. Pete McGettigan
Organisations providing call centres would do well to learn from the IT industry in its (albeit gradual) adoption of ITIL. Here performance is measured against SLAs between customer and provider. This necessarily means that the front line Service Desk (note the name) and the background support staff have a shared set of objectives and simply have to work together to maintain and improve customer service. This is measured by availability, capacity, timeliness, (perceived)customer satisfaction, MTBF, MTTR etc and not just volume of calls or queue length (though these too are still relevant of course). The 'desk' can't function effectively in isolation. The ITIL disciplines align to provide a full support matrix.
9. James Robinson
Which supermarket was it?
Why not name them to save any potential new customers reading this page, from experiencing the same shoddy service?
10. Stuart Vine
This situation will not be remedied until a few smart companies see that really good customer service can act as a profit driver. This might sound strange but good service could cut down "churn"and act as a word of mouth advertising tool.
Strangely, IT departments are also often seen as a cost, not a profit driver...
11. Tony Digby
Maybe the problem is the lack of knowledge on our part, the consumer. You have had a problem from a supplier and you have told them so but you have not told us, other consumers, who the poor supplier is. Therefore there is no incentive for the supplier to improve. If we get poor service tell them but also tell others.
12. Harry Cruickshank
I'm consistently surprised and disappointed at the opportunity companies miss to engage customers effectively and then use that connection to develop a profitable relationship. Even more stupefying are those that take a well-developed customer base and treat them so badly that they leave.
Any marketing student can tell you that long-term success is based on a balance between new business growth and retention/repeat business.
As stated by others, cost control is one of the villains here, but it's not alone. Quoted companies, tied to the slavering two-headed beast of shareholder and city expectations, are inevitably focused on a headlong rush for new business revenues at the expense of (almost)everything else.
However, attitude is often the key. If you're truly focused on your customers' needs and interests, there are a variety of techniques to engage with them and build a long-term relationship without spending vast amounts of money.
Loyal and happy customers are the best (and cheapest) advertising/PR resource you'll ever have. Unhappy and abandoned customers are the worst.
The old adage is true - if you don't look after your customers, somnebody esle will.
13. Tony Digby
Maybe the problem is the lack of knowledge on our part, the consumer. You have had a problem from a supplier and you have told them so but you have not told us, other consumers, who the poor supplier is. Therefore there is no incentive for the supplier to improve. If we get poor service tell them but also tell others.
14. anonymous
It's funny isn't it? We all know that working in a call centre is an exceptionally thankless task. You only talk to upset customers (you wouldn't call if you weren't) and you are under intense pressure to close as many calls as possible. There should be little surprise that these poor punch-drunk staff aren't the most highly motivated staff in the world and this attitude comes across clearly in their phone manner.
We all know this, and the arguments expressed elsewhere show why big business it isn't going to change this trend in the short-term, but we insist on raging about it. Maybe it falls to the educated, intelligent consumer to accept the inevitable and modify their behaviour to facilitate the entire process.
- Take the name of the individual you talk to and a call reference number every time you call.
- Appreciate it isn't the call centre operative's fault you've got a problem. Be civil and polite, it's amazing how treating someone like a human being gets better results than abusing them!
- Be reasonable with your expectations - they aren't going to be able to resolve anything within minutes!
Follow the above advice and you'll make your individual interactions with call centres bareable while conglomerates sort out their Customer Service Strategies! It's not the way it should work, but it's going to help! Good luck.
15. Colin Scott
Martin
I would suggest that you find Local Government, Retailers and others who have initiated an ITIL environment for their service operations and deal only with them in future. This should ensure the services provided attain an acceptable level.
Kind regards
16. anonymous
Start talking with your feet. Your story would have been so much more vaild and interesting if you had explained that moving around suppliers enabled you to resolve the issues you had experienced.
17. Dennis Howlett
This is a muddled argument predicated on bad experience. Statements like "we all know" are meaningless. Who are we? How do 'we' know? Sure, some retailers are doing incredibly well. Too well in the eyes of some. But grees is not synonymous with efficiency. These companies are differentiated by having systems you'll find hard to beat this side of Wal-Mart.
The problem is not greed or arrogance but an inability to tie systems together in a meaningful way. They also have gnerational cultural problems that belie their ability to change.
Retail is supply chain obsessed so even when they talk about customers, they're not talking about you and I but a range of customers, most of whom will sort of fit a demographic profile.
There are no signs of this changing in the immediate future because there's simply too much value tied up in supply chain latency.
However, there is a genuine risk they will need to do something to address broad customer concerns. If so, then it will be interesting to see which way they jump.
Will it be a gradual though wholesale replacement of transaction based systems to stuff that is readiuly extended? Or will it be something else? It wil depend on just how much pain they're experiencing.
18. anonymous
Your unwillingness to publicly name the organization which gave you bad service makes you complicit in its perpetuation, in my opinion.
The disconnect between companies' marketing, customer service and operations is, as you say, the problem - with customer service tending to follow the line dreamed up by marketing rather than trying to actually engage with the operational deficiencies.
19. john feeney.
I could not agree more,the customer is treated as a nuisance.In my case BT have failed to correct a billing problem,their error,for the last 9 months.I have sent them 22 e-mails and all I get is an automated reply which I do not understand. Now I have technical problems with my BB connection and the same cycle has commenced with this issue.
I implore you, I plead with you,I will even pay you to give BT and all its junk
a wide berth as common manners does
not exist in this infernal company.I want to start a crusade against this despot of foul service, join me please.
JF. Dublin. Ireland.
20. Gene Wirchenko
Anonymous of Oxford, MD wrote this paragraph:
Your unwillingness to publicly name the organization which gave you bad service makes you complicit in its perpetuation, in my opinion.
Ah, the irony of an anonymous poster writing that.
Anonymous of Oxford, MD wrote this paragraph:
The disconnect between companies' marketing, customer service and operations is, as you say, the problem - with customer service tending to follow the line dreamed up by marketing rather than trying to actually engage with the operational deficiencies.
I quite agree. When I have a complaint, I call because I want the cause resolved. A chirpy "Thank you for calling." does nothing. Often, I have a suggestion for resolving the problem. These appear to rarely go anywhere. I can and have stopped dealing with companies with bad customer service.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
21. Richard Cruz
I whole heartedly agree with your views. Nowadays, when I deal with a call center for customer service, I give the rep who answered my call one chance to A) understand my problem and B) make me feel satisfied that they have the problem in hand and it will be resolved. If they fail on either of these points, I do not hesitate to ask for their manager, and escalate my problem as far up the chain as it takes.
It just seems like the first responders to any issues at these call centers has a script or flow chart that they had better be able to pigeon hole your problem into or you are going to have a great deal of trouble gettting them to solve it. I believe this comes down to the reps having no real experience with the products they support, as you mentioned.
22. Jane Wineteer
Having spent many years working in a job that required daily interaction with the public, I can tell you that the first and most important service that can be rendered is to make the caller know you care about the stated problem/request. Everything else hinges on that. If you are then able to do something concrete to assist the caller, that is almost icing on the cake. If you cannot provide the help requested, you will still part "friends."
23. Marek Grabowski
Most people shop online in the misguided belief that self-service is more convenient, consistent, efficient and therefore, more rewarding than dealing with inadequately trained shop assistants or call centre operatives. But merchants have sidestepped the issue of providing genuinely helpful levels of online information and support by turning their sites into mere signposts to their expensive call centres. A Call Me button is not what I call self-service. And with calls costing from £2.50 to £50, depending on their complexity, this preoccupation with driving customers to make a call in the first place just doesn't make commercial sense. A call to a human agent should be a customer's last course of action, but all too often it's the only option available. Call centres are the white elephants of the information age.
Sustainable long-term growth through lifetime value is the key to a healthy commercial future. It's what CEOs are always talking to the press about, for the benefit of city analysts. However to achieve it requires customer loyalty, which in turn depends on the provision of superb levels of after-sales self-service, self-help and support. It's not rocket science. So why am I still stuck in a call queue waiting to be served?
24. Parveen Kumar
I am waiting for a legal person to join in to give this this discussion a positive direction, in terms of what customers can do to ensure that they GET the level of service and problem resolution expected. For example, recording phone calls at their end, getting agents name, logging calls, getting a call reference etc. Which of these, or any more, means can a consumer adopt to ensure that they get proper Customer Service.
25. Man de Hu
Mebbe someone will put up a Web page/Blog *LISTING* the culprits. I hope this cannot be attacked in Court...
26. Nicky Bearsted
Martin
It is not clear why you believe outsouced private provision in the healthcare system would result in worse service. A private provider can be fined or sacked if its performance falls short of that required by contract. An internal service, particularly froma large public body such as the NHS, is much more likely to be indifferent.
27. David
I totally agree with the point about 0845 numbers: they are not cheaper, they cost up to 4 p per minute, compared to calls to any 01 or 02 number which, during the day, costs me a maximum of 3 p per call (0 p per minute). The same calls cost me nothing at all in the evening. Not only is customer service bad in a lot of companies, but they have the cheek to make us boost profits for them and phone companies by using the expensive 0845 and even more expensive 0870 numbers, which were never cheaper than calling a geographical number (unless you compare the costs to calling a geographical number 20 years ago perhaps). I have found the following companies to have extremely poor customer service and will avoid them unless they change considerably: NTL, One Tel, Ebuyer, Dabs, Kaspersky, Pandasoft, Microland Technology (they have since gone into liquidation), VistaPrint, Abbey (for business customers), NatWest, PowerGen.
28. misceng
To Nicky Bearstead, I have worked in a Government Department and know from bitter experience that an outside contractor can get on the approved list fairly easily but a LOT of documented proof is needed to get them off the list and no one has the time to assemble that proof. The result is that locally the contractor is avoided by professionals who know. The administration gets complaints from the contractor and the professional is pressured into using him and finds it difficult to avoid as the documented proof of incompetence is not available.