Last week I tried to get a replacement part for my stationary bike. One of the end caps from the handle bars had cracked and needed to be replaced…

First, I called the local store. They didn’t have any and instructed me to call their central service department number.

The service department indicated that because the bike was not a current model, I needed to get the part from the US manufacturer – Vision Fitness. They provided the hotline number.

I called the Hotline and sat on hold for 15-20 minutes before getting a live person. They were very helpful and indicated that the replacement part would cost $0.78 USD. They proceeded to get my mailing address for shipment.

They then indicated that it would be mailed at a cost of $10.00 USD.

When I asked why a $0.78 plastic part was going to cost $10.00 to ship I was told “that’s our minimum shipment cost”. The cost didn’t reflect the weight — it was a minimum charge for them to send out any part.

I had already invested thousands of dollars to purchase their machine. I guess the figured they already had my money and what was the likelyhood of me purchasing a second stationary bike.

Well the part wasn’t that critical and I had already spent too much time on the issue, so I decided to forget about it and just live with a cracked end cap.

What initially seemed like a minor issue was no longer worth the trouble.

My Perspective: A customer-focused organization anticipates situations like this and would simply offer to put a part like this in the mail. The fact that they have a minimum charge indicates that their first concern is their own profitability — not the customer. They will only make the customer happy if it first serves their profit motive.

We should ask ourselves whether our policies are addressing our employees and customers needs — or simply acting as barrier to providing exceptional customer service.

Recently I upgraded my cell phone. It seemed like a simple enough process — until it was time to have the phone delivered.

After a positive telephone experience with the representative who placed the order, I was told the new phone would be delivered usually within 3 – 5 business days.

On day 5 I decided to follow up and find out what was happening since I was going to out of town for a couple days. The adventures began.

When I called my service provider to find out the status , they indicated that the product had been back-ordered and was just now back in stock – but they did not know when it was to be delievered. They offered me a number where I could tracking the order.

So I called this number — where they informed that; 1) the phone had not been shipped and, 2) there was a problem with the order so they couldn’t tell me when it was shipped.

When I inquired about the problem with the order, they indicated it was a technical issue on their end and they were working on it. Apparently a number of orders did not get process correctly and they were working to fix the “glitch”.

I indicated that while I was certainly sympathetic to their technical issues, I was more interested in when my order would be shipped now that they had identified that there was a problem. They indicated that they were working on the technical issue.

As you might guess I asked to speak to someone else — a Supervisor perhaps? This person confirmed the fact that there was a technical issue, but also indicated that they had identified which orders were affected and that they were hand packaging these orders and they should be out within a couple days. They suggested that I call back after 3 days if I had still not received my phone.

My Perspective: This lack of transparency left me feeling unloved and unappreciated as a customer.

This organization could have saved both money and customer goodwill by simply being proactive and sending a message to me informing me of the issue. After all, they certainly had my email address — I was one of their customers.

Instead they stuck their head in the sand and tried to hide the problem.

Even if only a small per cent of customers called with enquiries, an email to all affected customers would have avoided the phone calls and the resultant cost. They clearly anticipated the calls since the CSR’s were given the update — but the CSR’s were not given enough detail to actually provide a clear answer.

One of the key drivers of customer loyalty is transparency. The feeling that you understand what is going on and can trust the company to treat you fairly. When you hide the truth — you lose credibility and customer trust. An easy first step to losing the customer.

Possibly more important, it sends a clear signal to your employees about how you will treat them as employees. Neither situation bodes well for a high performing organization

By the way, my new phone arrived 2 days later as promised. I’m still trying figure out all the new features

I recently submitted an article to one of the online publishing sites. It was rejected for broaching their rule of using company names in the content.

I used the spelling “excelerate” versus the correct spelling — accelerate — since I have trademarked the term Performance Excelerator^TM. I always use this spelling. It is part of my brand.

But because the term Performance Excelerator is trademarked in my author signature they rejected this spelling.

The publisher wants to avoid self promotion within their articles and maintain the integrity of the article content and their site. All appropriate objectives that most authors are very happy to follow — including myself.

I wrote and explained it was the spelling I always used and not to do so would be inconsistent with my branding.

I was not promoting my company name (Bill Hogg & Associates), nor was I drawing attention to the specific word for promotional purposes through bolding. It was just spelled differently in line with my trademarked name The Performance Excelerator.

While I hoped they would see the reason why this guideline should be waived in my case, I recognized the reasoning behind their guideline and was willing to forego publishing the article rather than use the correct spelling.

Upon review, they published the article based on this special circumstance.

My Perspective: Even a rule that is in place for all the right reasons may need to be broken given certain circumstances. Having a guideline that is based on an outcome that is widely understood allowed someone in the organization to make a decision based on the specific circumstance.

Are your rules supported by clear guidelines that provide guidance if a unique circumstance arises that isn’t covered by the rules?

 Staples had a sale on computer remotes. Regular price $74.99, on sale for $19.99 — a $50.00 savings. I already had one, but at that price, it made sense to get a back-up.

I dropped by on the way home — unfortunately I arrived at 5 minutes past closing time. The doors were open, people were shopping and cash registers were open.

However, I was denied entrance. I asked if I could enter, explaining that I was there to pick up a specific item and that I knew exactly where it was located. No deal. The young man at the door had his orders. No one was allowed in after closing time.

I didn’t get my back-up remote. They lost the goodwill of a customer.

Which was worse?

My Perspective: This is a perfect example of the need for guidelines versus rules. It is difficult for rules to be flexible. But guidelines allow for real people to make decisions based on specific circumstances. Why was this employee not empowered to make a simple call on an issue?

Frequently I have discussions with clients that are based on a specific issue that has arisen. My advice is always to avoid creating a rule that will fix that issue — but to look for the guideline that would have prevented the issue.

Then you either need to create a guideline that will avoid numerous similar issues — or communicate the existing guideline better so people know how to work within it. We usually agree that communication and training is the issue versus creating a new guideline.

So the next time an issue arises and you are thinking about creating a rule — stop, and look for the root cause and focus your efforts there.

Do you need a new guideline — or do you just need to communicate the existing guidelines better?

By the way — I did get the remote — my wife was kind enough to drop by the next day and pick one up. But Staples never regained their goodwill.

I phoned the call centre at Mirvish Productions  to renew our tickets subscription for the next theatre season. The CSR quickly went about renewing my subscription. I am sure I was one of a long list of calls that day doing exactly the same transaction. She was very efficient in getting the order processed.

However, after twice telling her the payment option I had chosen was 50% today and the balance in 3 months — she processed the entire order as a single payment immediately.

When I for a third time told her I wanted the 2 part payment — she said “That’s not what you said”

My Perspective: There are 2 issues here.

The first is simply listening. Even when you are doing the same thing again and again — remember, each customer is unique. And even if they are not — we need to make them feel like they are.

The second is more bothersome. A CSR should never tell a customer they are wrong. I was very clear about my request, but even if I was wrong, or just forgot to ask, there are much better ways to deal with this situation than placing the blame on the customer.

I don’t subscribe to the philosopy that the customer is always right. But I am pretty sure there is rarely a good reason to tell them they are wrong.

In February I wrote a post about a recent service recovery experience with Swiss Chalet.

I thought I would share the subsequent follow up I had with the manager of the particular store I mentioned.

The franchise manager called a couple days later because I had made a comment through their website about my experience. I thought it would be interesting to see how they reacted.

The timing of the return call was pretty quick, but upon connecting, her first concern was to ensure that the issue was with her particular location — and not another  location. I confirmed it was her location.

She then asked what I wanted to make this right — yes those were her exact words. I indicated I wasn’t looking for anything — I had just responded to the feedback form that was made available to me for feedback. They had asked — so I assumed they were interested in what I had to say.

She then indicated that she was calling because “the Franchise owner wanted me to clarity that it was their store”.

She saw I had received a $6.00 credit and said “she would take up with the central organization”. Implying that somehow, someone else had dropped the ball in the total experience.

And that concluded the call. Not even an apology on behalf of her store.

My Perspective: This encounter is part of a much bigger problem I am seeing in the service industry — particularly the auto industry. The follow-up survey for customer satisfaction.

You know the one — where corporate has arranged for a survey company to call customers to gain feedback and then punishes the outlet if they have poor performance.

This results in employees basically asking people to give them a high ranking so the employees/outlet doesn’t get in trouble or even penalized. Talk about a skewed result. Employees start to “game” the system when feedback is used as a stick.

How is this type of information gathering supposed to help businesses improve? They have missed the real opportunity for honest feedback because they have forgotten the purpose of the feedback loop.

 So have a look at your customer feedback programs. Are they focused on improving the experience or punishing the laggards. Are they being implemented simply because you know that you should be measuring customer experience — or are you using this important tool to fine-tune and continuously improve.

There are much more effective ways to deal with the poor performers.

On the recent weekend, we expected family and friends would be dropping by at irregular intervals with their various activities — making regular meals less likely.

I decided to stop at The Pickle Barrel — a well known Toronto restaurant and delicatessen — to pick up some bite-size deli sandwiches so we would have some easy snacks available whenever anyone was hungry. However, we are not fans of their lox and cream cheese sandwiches which are part of their pre-made party platters.

I asked if I could get a selection without these sandwiches and they confirmed this was possible — but would require a wait while they made up the platter. No problem. I placed my order and said I would be back in the recommended 15 minutes.

When I returned to pick up my order they rang it up and I was surprised that the price had increased by 50% versus the posted price. When I questioned the accuarcy of the bill, I was informed that mine was a custom order and this resulted in the surcharge. This was the first I heard of any surcharge. It was also something never charged in the past.

I asked to speak to the manager since I felt they should have mentioned this when I placed my order so I could have decided whether I wanted to; 1) the pay the surcharge, 2) take the standard platter, or 3) not order at all.

The manager claimed he was unaware of the surcharge and would look into it — but was unwilling to take any action.

I left wondering what function this manager played. He claimed ignorance of a policy that a cashier was implementing — yet was unwilling or unable to do anything about the policy.

More importantly, I was surprised by his complete lack of interest in the issue. It was simply, “I don’t know and I don’t care”.

My Perspective: Of course, the issue was not the charge, or the amount. The issue was that an extra charge was not clearly communicated to me and resultant I was surprised by the change. This left me feeling trapped into a purchase I may not have wanted.

On a more expensive purchase, in addition to breaking trust, this could lead to embarrassment if the customer was unwilling or unable to pay the demanded amount.

It is critical that any extra charges be clearly communicated to customers before the service is provided.

Plus, it is equally important to make sure that you communicate the reason(s) for the extra charge in a manner that demonstrates value to the customer.

Transparency is a key driver of customer satisfaction and loyalty. Don’t risk losing a customer because you assume they understand your pricing structure.

Review your pricing structure to ensure there are no hidden surprises and that every employee is clear on how to communicate the value associated with the change that justifies the increase.

We often hear organizations talk about their focus for the upcoming period — whether for the year or the quarter. I am always slightly amused when I hear an organizations talking about customer service being a key focus.

This usually a sign that they see Customer Service as a tactic to be employed at various times — much like a new ad campaign or pricing strategy.

These are usually the same organizations that think customer satisfaction is a goal (vs. outcome) and can be impacted by a training program to all their CSR’s.

Customer service is not a tactic. It needs to be a long-term strategy that is embedded into your organizational DNA or culture.

Customer service is not a tactic you employ as part of a plan — instead it should be the foundational theme that links every tactic together to provide differentiation.

My Perspective: If you find yourself talking about customer service using words like focus, initiative or tactic, you need to re-think the role of customer service within your organization. And that starts with reviewing your internal culture and values.

Customer service is not something you put on like a shirt and tie. It is an attitude you live and breathe in everything you do. Make sure it includes the language you use when you communicate it internally and externally.

We’ve all heard this expression, but I was reminded recently how important this adage is by an experience I had when I was a young Account Executive with one of Canada’s largest advertising agencies.

A large international client from Boston was in Toronto for a day of meetings and I was responsible for making sure that lunch was available.

In a trip to their office months earlier, the client had mentioned that he disliked chicken with bones — he preferred chicken breast and remarked that he always purchased boneless breast for his barbecue. The single exception was St-Hubert Bar-B-Q Chicken with dipping sauce which he had discovered on a trip to Montreal. He was so enamoured by their dipping sauce that he wished it was available in Boston where he would gladly picked it off the bones.

Based on this personal insight I ordered St-Hubert chicken for our lunch.

My agency President was aghast.

We were effectively serving a large international client a fast food meal rather than a traditional catered meal. He felt that we had lost an opportunity to impress this important client with our hospitality and even feared that we would be perceived as second rate versus our international cousins.

He quietly took me aside to give me some “constructive” feedback.

Fortunately, the client overhead his whispered comments.

The client indicated that he was thrilled that I had taken the time to arrange this special lunch for him and proceeded to sing my praises for remembering this small fact that he had shared with me months earlier.

He continued that this was a further demonstration of the care and attention that I applied to every aspect of his business and went so far as to state that he saw no need to replace the recently departed Account Supervisor on his business — voicing his confidence that I was ready to step into this role (a promotion that was wisely swift in coming after the meeting ).

My Perspective: Paying attention to our clients specific needs/desires allow us to tailor our products/service to their needs and build trust and confidence.

The client felt more important by the personalization of the meal choice than he would have ever felt regardless of the expense of a generic meal that may have been served to any client.

What might have been disaster for another client was pure magic for him. Are you looking for the opportunities to create a moment of magic for your clients — or just providing the same generic service o everyone?

I recently read an article “Consistency Is Far Greater Than Rare Moments of Greatness” by Scott Ginsberg The Nametag Guy.

In it he makes the point “Because ultimately, consistently is greater than rare moments of greatness. And people only give you credit for that which they see you do consistently.”

It brought to mind that even before we become great — we must first become consistent. If you talk to any professional athlete, cook, public speaker, salesperson or customer service representative, they will all tell you that before they became great they first had to learn how to consistently deliver their product.

Only then were they able push to the next level — become faster, stronger or better.

In the book “The Myth of Excellence“, Crawford & Mathews state the key to successful organizations is first becoming consistent across the 5 key attributes (price, service, access, experience, and service) that consumer’s desire — and then achieving dominance in one and differentiation in a second, while remaining at par with the competition across the balance.

In my post Don’t Be A Jack of all Trades, I talked about focusing on your strengths — but only after you have brought your weaknesses up to par.

The consistent message here seems to be that before we ever become great we must first become consistent with customer expectations across all touch points.

Even if you are great in one area of your business — or one department — a single interaction with your customers that is below expectations can render the entire experience as negative. Think about after-sales service. Any issues come to mind personally.

My Perspective: Look at your customer experience map and look for areas where you are below par. Fix them

Then look for areas where you are or can be exceptional. Leverage them.

Don’t try to be great in all things, figure out what you want to be known for and make that the area that you will seek dominance.