I'm going to start by relating a recent set of customer service interactions. Please understand that everything I say is my interpretation of things. This is opinion, not objective facts (but that's the whole issue.)
Jogo Canada a Winnipeg games store that I frequent. I probably go in there 4 to 5 times a year, and I'll spend between $40 and $200 a visit. A couple of weeks ago I'd stopped in to pick up a birthday gift for a friend. I grabbed the latest Settlers of Catan expansion, knowing she was a fan of the original game. Unfortunately her husband had the same great idea. No problem, I decided to keep it, and inquired if she'd tried Starfarers of Catan. She was intrigued, so I promised to pick it up for her in replacement. The weekend before last, JP and I returned to Jogo to do just that. When we walked in the door, the clerk sitting behind the desk asked us if he could help us find anything. In my opinion it didn't sound like he was happy to see us, so I declined, indicating I knew what I wanted. I walked over to the section where the Catan games were, but could not see it. At this point I said that I was looking for Starfarers, but I didn't see a copy. The clerk, brusquely (again, in my opinion) informed me that it was there. I replied that I saw two copies of the expansion to Starfarers, but no copies of the actual game. His reply was something to the effect of "Oh, that's all we've got." By now I was very displeased with the whole interaction. I felt that the service was completely unfriendly. I made one last attempt, asking if they had any coming in. The clerk stated that they were concentrating on other areas, but that I should try the Explore Store in the mall. At that point I left. For good. I won't be going back to Jogo.
Fast Forward one week. Having not had time the Saturday of the Jogo visit, JP and I hied off to the Explore store. There were two clerks behind the counter, neither of whom said a thing to me as I entered. I walked over to the strategy games section, grabbed a copy of Starfarers, and went to the till. The one clerk asked if I found everything, and rang up my purchase while the other clerk bagged it. I probably exchanged no more than 20 words with them but both were friendly. I'll go back to the Explore Store.
So why did I start by saying that "Perfect Service Quality Loses Customers"? Well, based on a 'Quality checklist' approach, I will bet that the Jogo clerk would score much higher than either of the Explore Store Clerks. Let's look at the objective facts. He greeted his customer when they entered and offered assistance. He never said 'no' or 'can't' but rather phrased things in more positive wording. He offered alternatives. These are exactly the type of objective behaviours that end up on Quality Checklists.
He followed the process of customer service, and lost a customer.
The clerks in the Explore Store barely interacted with me but they left me willing to return. I don't know if they had any steps they were supposed to take, but they were friendly.
Process is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you do the right things, if those right things don't have the desired result. I'm guessing that the Jogo clerk was taking the steps he'd been taught to serve a customer. However the result was a very bad taste in my mouth. I went away displeased, so I won't return.
I spent a few years as a Quality Analyst. I know why the industry creates checklists and focuses on behaviours that can be objectively rated. I also know that none of that creates good customer service.
So what's the answer?
Toss out the checklist.
Ignore the score.
Talk about results!
Showing posts with label Quality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Quality. Show all posts
Tuesday, 19 August 2008
Saturday, 1 September 2007
Numbers
Why do people think numbers have intrinsic meaning. In my work as a Quality Analyst I provide numerical expressions of the state of affairs in customer service. But all too often people look at the numbers as if the actual values were important. 85% is bad where 90% is good?
If I tell a company that their customer satisfaction is 85%, do they need to improve, or are they doing too much? The number is meaningless out of context, but so many people look at it as if it mattered.
A few years back I designed a quality assessment program for customer service where a baseline score was 60%. Managers were absolutely terrified when they saw Quality Scores of 70% being reported. They knew that quality was bad unless the score said 90%.
If I tell a company that their customer satisfaction is 85%, do they need to improve, or are they doing too much? The number is meaningless out of context, but so many people look at it as if it mattered.
A few years back I designed a quality assessment program for customer service where a baseline score was 60%. Managers were absolutely terrified when they saw Quality Scores of 70% being reported. They knew that quality was bad unless the score said 90%.
Friday, 10 August 2007
Quality in Customer Service
As an Analyst in the Customer Service industry, I'm often struck by how many people seem to approach Customer Service Quality as if it were no different from Quality in the Manufacturing Industry.
In the Manufacturing world, quality is a function of inputs. The nature of the materials used, and the processes applied to them determine the quality of the finished product. If I want to ensure a high quality product, I can do so by ensuring high quality inputs (top quality raw materials and rigourous processes). In theory, I have all but 100% control over the inputs, and thereby, 100% control over the outputs.
In the world of Customer Service, the most significant input is a variable. The Customer is the main input of customer service, and I know very little about that input until I come into contact with it. I don't even know if the Customer is male or female.
The second most significant input is also a variable. That input is the Customer Service Professional. As part of a Customer service group, the CSR has a unique style, a unique set of skills and talents, and a unique set of biases and blind spots. The process that works for another person may not work for the CSR.
We can't approach Customer Service with rigour. Rather, our approach must be principled and dynamic. The CSR must understand what they want to achieve, but they have to have sufficient freedom of movement to use their strengths and to compensate for their weaknesses in achieving it.
In the Manufacturing world, quality is a function of inputs. The nature of the materials used, and the processes applied to them determine the quality of the finished product. If I want to ensure a high quality product, I can do so by ensuring high quality inputs (top quality raw materials and rigourous processes). In theory, I have all but 100% control over the inputs, and thereby, 100% control over the outputs.
In the world of Customer Service, the most significant input is a variable. The Customer is the main input of customer service, and I know very little about that input until I come into contact with it. I don't even know if the Customer is male or female.
The second most significant input is also a variable. That input is the Customer Service Professional. As part of a Customer service group, the CSR has a unique style, a unique set of skills and talents, and a unique set of biases and blind spots. The process that works for another person may not work for the CSR.
We can't approach Customer Service with rigour. Rather, our approach must be principled and dynamic. The CSR must understand what they want to achieve, but they have to have sufficient freedom of movement to use their strengths and to compensate for their weaknesses in achieving it.
Wednesday, 6 December 2006
Start at the Top
As an analyst, I often get asked for my opinion on challenges faced by organizations. Sometimes my own, sometimes those of friends or acquaintances. I'll probably talk about those here, but I will make things anonymous to protect the confidentiality of the organization.
An acquaintance recently presented me with the following situation. A new project in his organization was floundering badly. Productivity and quality were both consistently under target. This had been an ongoing issue since the initiation of the project. He talked about the discussions he'd had with the project managers, and the actions they'd tried. Despite those initiatives, the various teams responsible for the project had failed to improve. His question to me was whether I had any thoughts on what else he could do to get the project turned around.
My response to him was very blunt. Look at the leadership. Any time you have a unit that is consistently under-performing, you need to ask yourself if you have the right people leading that unit. I believe it is entirely appropriate to start by looking at systems and processes, but once you've addressed those, it comes back to people.
People follow their leaders, in more ways that are immediately obvious. If you've got an organization that delivers poor quality work, the leadership doesn't value quality. If you've got a unit who in unproductive, ask how productive the leader is. These are problems that start at the top.
An acquaintance recently presented me with the following situation. A new project in his organization was floundering badly. Productivity and quality were both consistently under target. This had been an ongoing issue since the initiation of the project. He talked about the discussions he'd had with the project managers, and the actions they'd tried. Despite those initiatives, the various teams responsible for the project had failed to improve. His question to me was whether I had any thoughts on what else he could do to get the project turned around.
My response to him was very blunt. Look at the leadership. Any time you have a unit that is consistently under-performing, you need to ask yourself if you have the right people leading that unit. I believe it is entirely appropriate to start by looking at systems and processes, but once you've addressed those, it comes back to people.
People follow their leaders, in more ways that are immediately obvious. If you've got an organization that delivers poor quality work, the leadership doesn't value quality. If you've got a unit who in unproductive, ask how productive the leader is. These are problems that start at the top.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)