Why Customer Service in Social is not Fair

Two weeks ago I had an issue with a large bank.

It's frustrating to be upgraded to a service you didn't request, don't want, value or need based upon a marketing campaign, and then have to take time and use energy to have it corrected.

While I could have used the banks' Twitter presence as a way to get the issue resolved fast, I decided to test the organization by going through normal customer service channels.

I'm still waiting for a communication that confirms our conversation. Needless to say, I won't be a customer for much longer.

Customer service is good brand management, just like contracts are marketing, just like how your people behave on the delivery floor are marketing, etc.

If your brilliant growth idea is to force customers to opt out, you will succeed, permanently.

Organizations with broken systems are also learning another important lesson -- whether they have outposts in social networks or not, customers will take their issues online.

How long are you willing to go down the reactive route?

Fair vs. special in social

Because issues get amplified quickly online, many businesses are finding themselves in a vise -- impact of presences in social networks depends on overall customer experience. Social outposts are a double-edged sword, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Depending on the organization's karma, not being there may not be an option anymore. However, being more responsive than through normal channels, "DM me your account and we'll take care of things", sets a bad precedent.

It sends the message that when all else fails, complaining publicly will get to a resolution, and it usually does. And because from experience all else has by and large failed for many with so many organization published customer service channels, people who can now skip those entirely.

Life is not fair, we all agree on that. However, the root cause of special vs. fair treatment online comes from deep organizational disconnects. Unless your business plans to use what it learns online as an opportunity to fix internal processes, social outposts will continue to be expensive lightning rods.

Expensive on two fronts:

1. special customer treatment due to least effort and cost for customers to get their issue resolved, which is not sustainable for the business
2. bad influence on the rest of the people watching what is happening, which is the worst kind of advertising you don't buy

 What can you do to bridge the disconnect?

Make every customer special

By fixing your internal systems and processes so that treatment is fair for all. People respect fairness when they experience it. It's a good business practice to look at the unintended consequences of short term decisions on the long term viability of your organization.

A solid reputation as a fair business gives you a good baseline to do more interesting things online. It buys you interest where there would be skepticism, or worse, a cynical outlook. It also positions your organization to benefit the most from social interactions.

Fairness builds credibility, the main ingredient in trust. The consistency of fair gives you a license to impress proactively. On the inside, fair frees you from the constant hair on fire situations, so you can invest that energy back into growing the business.

However, fair doesn't mean ignoring issues or covering up for them. Retaliating for negative reviews is not the way to go in the same way that rewarding only the digital squeaky wheels will set a precedent -- your lawyers agree on this one, too (go ahead, ask them).

The whole Web is a big customer conversation. Earn attention by using your outposts to grow commerce, to transform the tansactional nature of buying into repeat business. It's a preferable option to fighting to keep those transactions you've had with buyers from turning sour.

What is your behavior teaching customers? What can you do to make a difference today?

[hat tip to Judy Gombita for engaging in this conversation]

 

If you enjoyed this post from Conversation Agent, subscribe, share and like it.

Comments

[Brennan]

I think the truth here is that any public outcry requires serious backpedaling from companies or organizations. Social media has been useful because even though people can automate social media responses, the customer response has an opportunity to go viral, which can cost big $$$. (Ie. The airline luggage service guitar song, The BP Oil Spill, etc.) Social Media is just so much better because it creates groups of publicly unhappy people. Call centres isolate problems, which can be downplayed.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Sean -- agreed. However, when I call your 800-number to tell you I don't want your new cards, the old ones where just fine, and you spend the whole time trying to upsell me and put all kinds of obstacles in my way, your risk is I'm gonna tell all my friends what a horrible service I didn't get. And, by the way, I called to fix something I did not want that your bank forced me to fix. Want fair? Start treating customers with respect for their time.

@Jennifer -- the difficulty with franchises is that you are barking up the wrong tree. Yes, it is their brand nationally. However, the person who needs to fix it is the owner of the one store where you had the issue. Was the ruckus worth your time and energy? If the business is run poorly, it may end up out of business. The other side of the coin is the noise dozens of voices create in their own social channels, the mechanics of crying wolf, etc. I look at having a voice as a privilege.

@Scott -- repeated sales, which is the backbone of commerce, comes from turning many one time transactions into repeat business. The opportunity of social for commerce is indeed to create customers, some of whom will create other customers. It all starts with the business being wiling to serve those customers fairly.

@Jen -- thank you for sharing the link to your story. When companies are fair, they end up impressing us, no matter the channel. And yes, we end up talking about it with others who are looking for a referral.

@Chris -- a company that behaves well only in public, as an individual, certainly sends a specific kind of message.

@Kasey -- I used it as an example of not getting anywhere on regular channels and getting a prompt response in social. And I had a caveat in the post as well... the phone is actually pretty convenient, if you think about it, and could take no time at all if they didn't route it halfway across the world, put you on hold, or tried to upsell you. My point is often people take to public channels when they have been unable to resolve their issue through normal channels.

[Kasey Skala]

It's not that "DM me your info" is a bad tactic, it's the fact that most companies don't have good customer service in general. Regardless of the outlet, poor service is poor service. Has nothing to do with traditional vs. social.

Likewise, I have to disagree that "DM me you info" sets a bad example. More people are spending more time online. That's a fact. More people are finally realizing they have a venue to complain. That doesn't mean companies need to bend over backwards. It just means that we need to give customers more convenience and meet them at their preferred means of communication.

There have been a number of times where a customer has publicly complained about my organization. I acknowledge their frustration and attempt to resolve. Some I can, others I can't. And those who are habitual complainers are easy to spot.