I had dinner with a friend recently. It had been some time since we got together — so he shared a recent tale of poor customer service. It seems I attract these type of stories

I don’t recall all the specifics of the situation or the company involved, but he had called the call centre to complain about the lack of functionality on their company website. Apparently, he had tried to sign-up for some feature and he had been “kicked out” twice — so in frustration he call the customer service hot-line.

The CSR informed my friend that the functionality that he was trying to access was “down” . They also indicated that it had been down for a number of days and they had no information on when it would be up.

When my friend asked why they had not posted that on the website to save him the time and aggravation of filling in the form twice — the answer was “well that’s not our department, I just tell you what I am told to say.”

My Perspective: It should come as no surprise that I would be frustrated by the lack of concern about the customer by the company for not highlighting their technology issue. But I was more surprised that the CSR would offer such an “I don’t care” attitude.

Regardless of whether we are let down by another area of our organization (which unfortunately does happen) it is never a good idea to shift the blame. Apologizing on behalf of the organization for inconveniencing the customer is not the same as accepting blame.

Our job is to act on behalf of the organization with the goal of dealing with the customer issue — not identifying who to point the finger at. Later, we can look into a long term solution, which may identify that another department needs to make an adjustment.

Surely a simple answer that my friend had made an excellent suggestion and they would pass it on to appropriate department would have been better than the “not my fault, I don’t care” answer they got.

On the positive side, at least the company had let the call centre know there was a problem rather than leaving them out on a limb — but that was cold comfort to my friend.

A customer-focused organization looks first at the customers needs and then takes action to fix the issue for future customers. It never seeks to place blame — either with the customer or another area in the organization. That type of negative thinking never encourages a positive customer-focused work environment.

Recently a reader shared an experience with their Internet Service Provider (ISP) when they changed their internet plan to facilitate a faster download speed with a new high speed plan.

Based on the changes discussed, the CSR advised that the cost would remain the same unless they exceeded 50 GB per month download allowance.

This was more than ample as the previous plan was 12 GB and they didn’t even use all of that capacity. So they authorized the change and things happened as expected – until the next bill arrived.

The bill indicated an additional $10 per month for the new plan despite assurances from the CSR there was no extra cost.

Upon calling the ISP to inquire about the discrepancy, they were advised that they had been misinformed.

Not satisfied, they asked to speak to a supervisor. However the first CSR simply transferred them to a second CSR — where they had to explain the problem all over again. And was told no again.

The second CSR finally put them through to a supervisor who also confirmed that they had been misinformed and the supervisor couldn’t do anything about the situation.

When asked if they could re-instate the old plan, they were advised that it was impossible because the old plan no longer existed. The attitude was basically “tough luck”.

In frustration, they decided to contact the complaints department and, after a few days, received a call back from a supervisor who seemed to be genuinely interested in fixing this problem. They were able to change the plan back to the original plan at the original cost. Further, they apologized for the inconvenience.

My Perspective: Why do unhappy customers have to contact a special department to get things done that just make good sense?

Too many call centres have different departments that have different authority to address customer issues. Why do companies continue to assume the front line people don’t have the capability for making good business decisions?

They seem to be playing a math game about how many customers they will lose against how many will simply tolerate bad service and stay — rather than looking for a way to give all customers a good reason to stay.

If one supervisor was so easily able to solve this problem, why couldn’t the original supervisor?

There is an issue with training here — but the bigger issue is trust. Trust that employees can and will make good business decisions based on getting good training and well defined guidelines.

Everyone within the company should receive the same training so customers can be confident they will get the same help, no matter who they speak to.

Have you had any experiences like this? Where you call a call centre, are you given the run around because people don’t seem to know what they’re doing? Or maybe they just don’t care?

Make sure that when people call your place of business, that all employees are empowered to make things right — or can quickly get the approval from someone who can.

A colleague shared a story with me about a poor customer experience they had in a restaurant. A group of co-workers had arranged to get together for lunch to celebrate a colleague’s birthday. They chose a restaurant that they hadn’t been to before but wanted to try. My colleague called ahead to made a reservation for the group of 25 people.

The group arrived at the restaurant on time. However, despite having made the reservation, they had to wait quite a while before even being seated. Once seated and menus had been handed out, the group were ignored. Everyone was hungry and ready to order — plus they also had a limited amount of time before they needed to head back to work.

A waitress finally arrived to take everyone’s order.

After waiting for longer than seemed necessary, and observing other tables get their meals ahead of theirs, the group’s meals arrived EXCEPT for the meal ordered by the birthday guest. He didn’t receive his meal until most of the others were finished.

A complaint was lodged with the manager — but he didn’t seem to care. He offered no apology and, after being asked to comp that meal, refused to do so.

Because of this poor treatment, my colleague decided to write a letter to the head office of the restaurant chain. They detailed the experience and mentioned that in addition to the 25 customers they had lost directly — everyone would tell their friends they would not recommend visiting that restaurant as well. Ultimately, that meant that a much larger number of customers would be lost.

A few days later my colleague received a letter of apology in the mail and a $40 gift card.

However, they couldn’t find anyone willing to return to the restaurant to use it due to that bad experience.

My Perspective: Bad things happen in every business. However, the key to keeping customers happy is through honest communication and being accountable for the poor experience.

Your teams must be prepared and empowered to make things right — on the spot. Research tells us that when we fix a problem on the spot that loyalty actually increases more than if the customer is simply satisfied.

So rather than seeing a complaining customer as a problem — start seeing them as an opportunity to demonstrate your exceptional service recovery — and a way to build loyalty.

For example, if there was to be a delay in the preparation of meals, then the customer needs to be informed. Offering something to help address the situation also helps — in this case perhaps a basket of bread or something else could have been offered while they were kept waiting.

In this case, the effort was too little too late. They couldn’t regain the trust of the customers they lost through one bad experience.

The key is to take steps to rectify the problem quickly — instead of ignoring it. After all, we all know it’s easier to keep existing customers than to find new ones.

Have you ever received information from a company that was wrong? How did it make you feel about their product of service?

A reader shared an experience after having trouble with the PVR (Personal Video Recorder) for their TV.

The problem was that recorded programs would freeze in the middle of the program and the rest of the recording could not be played.

They contacted customer service about this problem as it was still under warranty. The customer service representative advised them to pack up the unit and they would arrange for a courier to pick it up to be repaired or replaced. However, the CSR couldn’t give them a time frame on the repair as there was a “backlog”.

The courier arrived as promised to pick up the unit. However, after two weeks with no news, the customer decided to call for an update.

They were told there was still a backlog and their unit was still waiting to be checked. Again no time frame was offered for the return.

Two more weeks passed — so another call. After a long discussion, the CSR indicated a new unit would be sent and would arrive within five working days.

The unit arrived, but when the customer opened the box they discovered that not only was it not a new unit, but it was the old unit returned packed in exactly the same way as when they initially sent it off.

Rather dumbfounded at this discovery, the owner called the call centre again and asked why they were given the old unit back and why hadn’t it been fixed. The reply was that the problem was actually in the programming and they were waiting for a new patch to be created that could simply be downloaded onto a memory stick and then uploaded onto the set top box.

The patch was planned to be available by the end of that week — so they were told. After numerous phone calls and emails back and forth over the course of the following four weeks, the patch was “still coming” and “wouldn’t be long now” was the basic reply, no matter who they spoke to.

Finally, six weeks after the initial call, they received the patch to download and once it was uploaded to the unit, the problem was fixed.

My Perspective: This is typical of a company that is focused more on themselves than their customers.

None of the people the customer spoke with seemed interested in taking ownership of the call or finding out the facts. They seemed more interested in getting the customer off the phone as fast as possible — possibly to keep their time/call down and call rate up.

Also, where did the initial operator get their information when they advised the customer to ship the unit back for a physical repair? Did they make it up? Was it simply an easy way to make the customer happy and get off the phone or did they actually check with someone? They wasted 2 courier charges and still ended up with an irate customer.

There are a number of issues here — but the most critical were a lack of communication about a technical problem supported by an intentional customer service strategy to deal with the issue, and secondly, employees giving customers information they don’t know to be true.

Even though the problem was eventually fixed, this customer was left with a negative experience regarding that brand and probably won’t use them again or recommend them to their friends.

Avoiding the issues and leaving employees to fend for themselves with customer service issues does no one any favours — so make sure your strategy for dealing with issues is intentional and supports the front-line team. And if your employees don’t know the answer, make sure they know how to find out before giving false information to a customer.

Recently my wife and her girlfriend spent 2 days a very popular spa St. Anne’s Country Inn and Spa. It primarily caters to women, although men and couples are also welcome. This has been a yearly ritual for these 2 ladies — a chance for a little personal “me” time — to get away from kids and responsibilities with a good friend.

Overall the visit was very enjoyable — but one particular experience raised an interesting question.

When she went for one of the treatments, she discovered the person administering the treatment was a male. She was surprised to find herself in a state of near undress while a male administered the treatment — without being asked if that was okay with her. The session was professional in all regards and she reported the quality of his work was also excellent.

However, that nagging discomfort of not being asked if she was alright with the situation remained.

Upon reviewing the website she discovered the following prominently displayed under their FAQ section

SPECIAL REQUESTS FOR THERAPISTS
Ste. Anne’s Spa employs both male and female professionally trained therapists. We are committed to the principle of Employment Equity, which means we will provide equal treatment in employment and will not discriminate on the basis of race, colour, religion, or creed, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, physical handicap, age, ethnic origin, or political belief, or other grounds prohibited by Provincial or Federal Legislation. Therefore to protect the rights of our employees we are unable to accommodate any special requests for therapists.

While the spa may have the best intentions for their employees — which is a good thing — where exactly does this policy consider the customer?

My wife is not a prude in any way — but not having the opportunity to indicate whether she was comfortable with a male attendant seemed very odd. It certainly didn’t make her feel like a “valued” customer. This policy seems out of alignment with their own brand promise as taken from the front page of their own website.

Far too many of us neglect what our body and spirits need most: relaxation, revitalization and a chance to heal from the intensity of our daily routines. Ste. Anne’s philosophy focuses on creating an atmosphere to help rebuild your strength, recapture your energy, and reflect on what’s truly important in your life.

After all, it would be very hard to relax and enjoy a session if you were uncomfortable with the person administering the treatment — regardless of whether you or I agree with their reasons.

Yet the spa has taken the position that the customer has no choice. Shouldn’t a paying customer have some input. Shouldn’t they have the option to decline service from a male if they were uncomfortable.

What if she had been someone with strong religious beliefs, or possibly overweight, or potentially having had surgery — possibly a mastectomy. All of these might have caused significant embarrassment or discomfort to the patron to have their treatment performed by a male.

One the other hand — some women would love the idea .

The spa may not be prepared to have guests request certain employees — but surely deciding on a male versus female should not be out of order.

My Perspective: First it is a strange policy to place so prominently on the website. This suggested that it has been an issue in the past — possibly certain therapists were more “in demand” than others which led to scheduling difficulties or disappointment by returning customers that their favourite therapist wasn’t available.

But isn’t that the job of every great employee — to build loyalty by creating a service experience that causes customers to request them by name.

Wouldn’t it be better to “recognize” great employees that have encouraged customer loyalty and then train those who need support achieving the higher service level.

This policy seems to be going in another direction entirely and definitely isn’t “on-brand”. Maybe I am missing something — but this policy is focused on the organization and doesn’t inspire employee excellence or customer loyalty.

A bad policy to start — and it sets a tone for how customers are viewed by the organization across the entire experience. Is it “on-brand” or “off-brand”?

Do you have any policies that aren’t focused on the customer and aligned with your brand promise?