Synopsis
Book by Janelle Barlow Claus Moller
Extrait
The Customer Speaks
It has been over ten years since the first edition of A Complaint Is a Gift was published. It’s embarrassing to admit that we naively believed poorly handled complaints would be a thing of the past as a result of the widespread distribution the original edition enjoyed. We heard a number of “wow” examples, such as a medical supply company in Kiev, Ukraine, that completely reorganized its approach to complaint handling based solely on the contents of the Russian-translated version. With examples like this from around the world, we assumed we’d soon be able to stop talking about complaints—even though we would miss that. Complaints are a fun topic for speeches. Stories about poorly handled complaints arouse a great deal of eye rolling and tongue clucking. We thought everyone would have understood that complaints are gifts.
It didn’t happen. In a 2006 survey of 3,200 U.S. and European consumers, 86 percent of respondents said their “trust in corporations has declined in the past five years.”1 In 2007, RightNow Technologies reported that after suffering a negative service experience,
80 percent of U.S. adults decided to never go back to that company
74 percent registered a complaint or told others
47 percent swore or shouted
29 percent reported they got a headache, felt their chest tighten, or cried
13 percent fought back by posting a negative online review or blog comment2
2
Finally, a Gallup poll commissioned by the Better Business Bureau, conducted between August 22 and September 8, 2007, found that 18 percent of adult Americans said their trust in business had dropped in the last year. Yet 93 percent of those surveyed said a company’s reputation for honesty and fairness is extremely important to them. The report concludes that if companies don’t deliver what they promise (the source of most complaints), customers will go somewhere else.3 It’s not a pretty picture.
While the ideas from this book have influenced a great many people, companies still get things wrong, and customers continue to complain— if we’re lucky. Service providers too often either blame customers for the mistakes they complain about or make them prove their positions. In many cases, they take so long to respond that customers forget what they complained about when they finally hear back from organizations. Customers frequently are forced to talk with robotic electronic voice systems that feebly attempt to replicate real conversations, and unfortunately, in some cases, these exchanges are better than live human interactions. And we won’t even cite the statistics for how long customers wait on telephones to talk with someone. When they finally are connected with a live person, it’s often someone living halfway around the world who reads from a script. Many customers become so frustrated with this type of communication that by the time they get to talk with someone, they start out angry and are automatically labeled problem customers—even though they may have been trying to buy something or have a simple question answered.
The deck is stacked against businesses trying to satisfy their customers. Customers expect satisfactory service. As a result, unsatisfactory service stands out. Because it stands out, it is more likely to be remembered and weighed more heavily compared to everything that went right. Ten transactions can go right, but that one mistake is what grabs consumer attention. This reality demands that we focus on what we can learn from customers who aren’t happy.4
Organizations, however, don’t seem to learn from their customers, as witnessed by the fact that most consumers face repeats of the very problems they already complained about. Most importantly, many service providers still see complaints as something to be avoided, as indicated by the fact that many organizations continue to pay bonuses to their managers based on reductions in complaints. Yet surveys conducted around the world demonstrate over and over again that companies with the best-rated service in their industry are the most profitable. It’s really that simple. And complaint handling is an integral part of that service rating.3
It is true that many people and organizations have learned how to handle complaints better. Several large companies have instituted sophisticated technological approaches to more efficiently respond to complaints. And many companies educate their staff in the best ways to respond to upset customers. But every year, a new group of service providers show up to work in organizations around the world—fresh representatives who haven’t had the advantage of the training offered by their employers. (Given the high rate at which call-center staff leave their jobs, they probably wouldn’t have much use for that knowledge in any case.) Every year, new types of complaints are presented by consumers. Eager and desperate managers somehow continue to delude themselves into thinking that the best tactic is to eliminate all the problems that create complaints, as if zero defects is actually attainable. And today, twelve years since A Complaint Is a Gift hit the bookshelves, more and more complaints are made public on the Internet, posted in vitriolic tones by dissatisfied customers.
Because of what customers are forced to endure, many call-center staff regularly have to serve unpleasant, upset customers whom they personally did nothing to create. Yet to be good service providers, they must be able to calm these customers down and deal with them in a way that makes them want to return to do business again at some time in the future. Unfortunately, many staff take customer bad behavior just as personally as customers take the bad service they have been offered, and staff defensive reactions leak out onto customers.
Is it any wonder that most call centers have such a difficult time holding on to staff unless they offer the best-paying jobs in the area? This rapid and regular loss of staff requires constant hiring of new, untrained staff. As a result, many call centers do not have staff who know how to effectively handle complaints, let alone understand that a complaint is being delivered unless it is spelled out with the precise words “I have a complaint.”4
Academic research on complaint handling hasn’t revealed earth-shaking new information since we surveyed studies for the original book. Greater and greater refinement, however, of what happens in the complaint process has been achieved over the past ten years. For example, more research has been conducted on differences of complaining styles between different national groups.5 This more detailed knowledge about consumer behavior has opened up additional areas to be researched. Here’s our conclusion after reading hundreds of research studies:
The more we know about service recovery, the more complex our understanding becomes.
The more we know, the more we need to know to get the results we want with service recovery.
The more we know, the more we need to experiment to see what works in specific situations.
While specific data may have changed, the research conducted in the 1960s through the 1990s has, more or less, held into the 2000s. No complaints there! In fact, it would be scary to think that a completely new understanding about complaints has popped up, necessitating an entirely new approach to complaint handling. Bottom line: the concept that a complaint is a gift holds true today as much as it did over ten years ago. Complaints are never going to go away, and organizations and their staffs need to adopt a strategy that enables them to recover customer loyalty when things go wrong.
What’s Changed
What has changed is that many organizations, led in this direction by very convincing research,6 have gained a deeper understanding about how important effective complaint handling—service recovery, as it has been referred to since the early 1980s—is in retaining loyal customers. These organizations understand the cost they pay in loss of both customers and staff when upset and dissatisfied customers are not handled well.5
Several organizations have also come to recognize that effective service recovery is an important part of creating powerful brands. In 2004, Branded Customer Service (by authors Janelle Barlow and Paul Stewart) examined the importance to brands of effective complaint handling.7 The conclusion: customers are remarkably forgiving of brands with promises that are not initially delivered as long as brand representatives respond to customers effectively, make good on original promises, and demonstrate that matters are improving. It also helps if the brand has a strong market image. One big key here is to rein in the marketing department so it does not make promises that the rest of the organization can’t deliver.8
Janelle Barlow also coauthored Emotional Value during this period.9 Emotional Value went into depth on how broken promises, mistakes, and inappropriate treatment affect customers emotionally. Some customers will accept outrageous mistakes as long as service providers are sincere, helpful, and concerned. At least they’ll accept mistakes if they don’t regularly recur. If staff maintain an attitude that feedback is one of the best types of communication they can have with customers, strategically they start off on the right foot to build emotional value with customers.
Saying “thank you” for negative feedback is just as powerful today as it was a dozen years ago. More importantly, the strategy behind thanking for feedback is even more important today than it was in 1996. Our mind-sets really do influence how we respond to our customers, and “complaints as gifts” is a powerful business mind-set for delivering service when our best efforts have collapsed and we don’t give customers what they expect.
Before we tell you how this new edition is organized, let us start this tale with an extraordinary “feel-good” example of complaint handling that is going to be talked about for a long time at Family Fare, a North Carolina convenience store chain. It’s a “remember the time,” epochal example for showing Family Fare store operators that they must never dismiss even the smallest customer disappointment that at first glance is due to just an honest mistake.
We’ll set the foundation first. Family Fare aspires to offer the best customer service of any U.S. convenience store—period. It invests a substantial sum of money in educating its store owners and managers about the brand of service it wants delivered and how to handle complaints. The company has created a simple brand promise and works like crazy to deliver it perfectly.6
Family Fare is a classic example—of the type covered by Patrick Barwise in Simply Better—of building a brand by getting the fundamentals right most of the time.10 Family Fare wants to be a midweek grocery store; it knows it can’t compete for the weekend supermarket shopping excursion. But it also doesn’t have to be a bottom feeder, gouging customers with high prices when they have nowhere else to shop. Family Fare stores are clean and well lighted, and staples are often priced the same as at supermarkets. Most Family Fare customers know the store operators (among the nicest and most sincere people you’ll ever meet) personally and love them. They are community for a bunch of people.
Lee Barnes, president, lives and breathes customer service. Complaints sent by e-mail to the Family Fare Web site come directly to him, and he responds personally. The following complaint was, in his words, a “real heart stopper.” Sitting in his car (hopefully not driving!), Barnes read a complaint (on his BlackBerry) from a customer who said she was refused entry into an Xbox sweepstakes because her home address was not close enough to a Family Fare store. She wrote that she owned rental property near one of the stores and that her military husband purchased gas there. She was so incensed, she would never shop again at a Family Fare, and other military families that she knew would follow suit. “What a pity that you overlook customers who WORK near your locations even if they don’t RESIDE by them. There are simply too many other places for us to buy our gas and sodas. Good Bye. Next time maybe you should hire someone with promotional experience to execute future giveaways.” Ouch. Her words stung—and from a military family.
Barnes sent a quick response from his BlackBerry thanking her for contacting him and assuring her that he would make it possible for her to enter the sweepstakes. It turned out that there was no problem with her address. Back-end Web commands unfortunately kicked people in her situation out of the contest. She wasn’t the only one, but she was the only one who complained. Once back at his office, Barnes sent the customer a longer message, again thanking her for bringing the situation to his attention so that he could help her and improve Family Fare’s customer experience. In an engaging letter, he told her that he would never have otherwise known and that he would personally sign her up for the contest.7
Her response to this second letter was considerably toned down. She said that two of her friends had had the same problem. More valuable information was given to Family Fare when she also indicated that the first e-mail she sent to complain didn’t go through because, according to an error message, she was more than ten miles away from a Family Fare store. In a third communication, this “complaining customer” wrote about her life and her children. “Okay well now you’re just being too darned nice so I won’t boycott your stores. I really do love Family Fare.” In a two-page e-mail, the woman revealed that her husband’s company commander had been killed the morning she had sent the original complaint. She had an adopted son and recently had taken in two additional foster children, one born addicted to drugs. The older son’s birthday was coming up and he wanted an Xbox, but they simply couldn’t afford one on their military budget. As she said, “Soooooooooo I see your contest and I’m thinking, ‘hey I will WIN Jess an Xbox,’ but alas, I was unable to enter. It was just sort of the last straw at that moment.”
By this time, Barnes and his customer were on a first-name basis. He was touched and decided to give Jessie an Xbox, whether he won or not. The company’s Web designer, who was also thoroughly involved, offered a video game to go along with the Xbox. The customer’s next letter carefully explained that she wasn’t after sympathy or charity. In fact, she was embarrassed by what she had originally written. As she said, “I don’t expect you to send us a game system. I just find it refreshing that a business truly cares, listens AND responds to a customer’s complaint.” Barnes responded that he hadn’t heard a request for sympathy; the company had an extra Xbox, and he felt that sending it to Jessie and his younger brother was a way to thank her for taking the time to explain her Web site problems so they could be fixed. Two weeks later, Jessie had his Xbox. The thank-you letters from mother and sons are difficult to read without tearing up.8
This example is about much more than just retaining a customer, though you can be sure that will happen. The story line is emotional and human. This mother’s grief and complaint gave Barnes and Family Fare a chance to behave as humanitarians. At a nitty-gritty customer service level, however, Barnes created a classic teaching example that shows all his store owners what can happen when a complaint is received from someone who simply buys gasoline and soda pop at a convenience store.
Most complaints don’t create such opportunities to show how good you really are. Most complaint examples don’t let yo...
Les informations fournies dans la section « A propos du livre » peuvent faire référence à une autre édition de ce titre.
