Winning 2-Minutes To Customer

Just read in Loksatta about one Mr Chitale receiving compensation of Rupees 7250 directly transferred to his bank account y British Airways for wheel of his bag getting damaged in handling. Airlines' response was smooth and speedy he said. Airlines had tried to repair the bag through their supply-chain partner but in vain.

In 1997, I was in NewYork on a group-study-exchange mission organised by Rotary International. While traveling from NewYork to Orlando, inadvertently my bag reached to Chicago. I complained to the airlines office at the airport. They promptly sanctioned 100 Dollars to me against the bills for essentials like overnight clothes, toothpaste, etc. Being around Disneyland I was happy to buy a couple Mickey-Mouse brand clothes at the airport.

Next day morning I got a 'good-morning' call from reception desk saying my bag was already in the hotel lobby safe and sound. Not much trouble for me although the airlines did have an opportunity to eliminate the error in baggage handling.

In a stark contrast to such delightful experiences, in 1981 I had to run from pillar to post knocking doors and windows in vain for a broken bag and its damaged contents due to erroneous handling by Air-India. Since then I avoid flying on it: a customer-quit as they say.

I remember that painful experience even after decades.

What is the learning?

There might be some chance of a person forgetting a good experience but hardly any chance of a customer forgetting bad experience from a supplier.

In case of one airline it was about 'sensitivity' to customer complaint while dealing it with a 'sense-of-urgency'. In case of other airline it was about 'indifference' to customer.

Now a days the sensitivity has acquired some strategy and structure to respond to customer complaints as a part of excellence-journey of companies. 

A Structure To Respond To Customer

I had introduced a 2-2-2-2©structure in terms of a model to respond to any stakeholder in general and to customer in particular. It was first introduced in a Cummins group company: Fleetguard Filters Limited Pune.

It was later on institutionalised in Cummins group worldwide.

In the context of a customer complaint, the 2-2-2-2© model might mean 2-Minutes, 2-Hours, 2-Days, 2-Weeks time-bound response to  customer for a given level of performance strived for. The response is supposed to eliminate root cause/s of the abnormality within 2-Weeks rather than stopping at first-aid treatment that anyway must be given within 2-Minutes. A powerful review mechanism driven by CEO (with an escalation matrix that an aggrieved customer can access in case of non-compliance) is an integral part of the structured process in order to ensure the timeline and quality of it's compliance. 

In the context of various other business situations, the timeline may be different and must evolve. For instance for an emergency/crisis having high impact, it could mean 2-Seconds, 2-Minutes, 2-Hours, 2-Days.

There is an empowerment mechanism built into the structure. Timeline-based visible dimensions as above are the generic ones. Company specific visible dimensions may be some sanction limits such as 100 Dollars compensation or a freedom to handover gift for the hassles or the efforts taken by the customer to complain and so on.

More important are the invisible dimensions that result into the culture reflected in terms of the spirit, the body-language, the humbleness, the humility such as that I had experienced while the airline employees responded to the complaint in making it hassle-free and speedy. 

There is tremendous scope and choice for innovations in both in order to delight customer with differentiation. The invisible ones in particular are difficult to emulate. That's where lies the competitive advantage.

If such a structure is implemented effectively, the customer becomes supplier's advocate and it's rewarding in long run as well as in terms of short term sales and numbers. Such an advocate is much more effective than even a highly paid marketing manager.

A prospective customer is likely to believe and act more often if recommendation comes from the horse's mouth: The Word-Of-Mouth!

A customer gets what s/he deserves: Shoddy Quality!

A Customer Complaint made to a reputed taxi service in Mumbai was: 

1/ The taxi booked was not found until few minutes after the appointed time. So the driver was called (by customer) to find out his 'whereabouts'.

Taxi was found to be parked away on road. The driver refused to go to customer's colony when requested. He threatened to go away if the customer did not go where the taxi was parked.

2/ Nor had he informed his arrival although he said that he had. In fact, customer called him up a few minutes after 'no-show'. Attached screen-shot of the customer's cell shows 'outgoing' to driver's number but not incoming from his number.

3/ On telephone as well as in person, when the driver was asked 'why he did not come inside the colony' he arrogantly replied: "Our Taxi-Service-Provider gives too much importance to Customer. (In his vernacular language: "Ye Taxi-Service-waleney Customer ko aisa, implying 'chadhake', banaya hai''...and so on).

Supplier's response after over a week of registering the complaint was:

"Please accept my sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused to you."

Where does the above real-life practice fit into business principles?

How should, a service provider wanting to stay and flourish in business, look at a typical customer complaint?

The above transaction is a typical case-study of INDIFFERENCE that should be avoided at all the touch-points with all stakeholders especially with customers by both the front-liners as well as the rear-end officers. (Reference 'world of Kaizen' book).

What is a customer's rightful 'expect'ation after a typical complaint (that hardly 4% of the dissatisfied customers choose to make):

1/ First of all the first-aid so that s/he gets quick relief. (In addition, apology is anyway expected but it's of no use without the First-aid.)

2/ Right to know specific details of what exact action was taken to prevent the situation from occurring in future.

How does a typical supplier respond. What INDIFFERENCE do most suppliers engage into:

1/ First of all they deny the complaint then they defend.

2/ They express dry apology without taking preventive action. Such an apology is like rubbing the wound. (The taxi service in above case fell in this category.)

3/ They don't keep customer informed about specific details of what exact action (if at all) was taken to prevent the situation.

4/ They expect customers to forget service-errors s/he had faced during the year in lieu of a yearly-gift-packet and/or sweets. While the gift 'dry-of-emotions' reinforces their vow to quit, most customers shamelessly accept it in exchange of an unexpressed abuse (to the supplier).

Funnily, a typical supplier doesn't mind recruiting a well-paid customer-care officer who is well-trained in handling an errate customer, and further training him in writing flowery letters so that 'issues' are taken 'care' of.

Result:  Customer continues the service provider only until s/he finds another option so that s/he can QUIT. Meanwhile, s/he plays the role of a devil-publicity-officer 'bad-mouth'ing the supplier's services among not less than a dozen prospective customers.

As someone says, it takes 10 times more money and efforts to acquire a new customer.

Isn't it wiser instead to invest this money in training associates on what the customer 'expects' rather than spending wastefully on reactively 'managing' the effects of indifference.

Should a customer bother about such 'small' issues?:

If s/he wants a change in such careless attitude, then yes!

S/he must play her small-bit-a-role though. Else, s/he should not blame suppliers for shoddy quality of service. S/he must help to get service-error out of the system which otherwise anyway will keep popping up above the carpet exactly when unwanted.

If and when it eventually does pop-up then the corresponding customer got what s/he deserved. Also s/he makes herself deserving to what s/he will get in future.

Customer or Custo-Mer?

That's what one is sometimes forced to say in Marathi: Custo-Mer.

Those who know Marathi (language of Maharashtra state in INDIA) know that  'Custo' (कष्ट), as it is pronounced in first part of the word customer, means 'donkey-like-efforts'. The second part 'Mer' (मर) pronunciation in Marathi means 'die'.

So, funny part of customer in colloquial language is: Custo-Mer (कष्ट-मर) is the one who is left to 'die' of his own 'donkey-efforts' in terms of endless followups to get a better service.

Most of us get such experience sometime or the other. Recently I reworked such 'efforts' like many others who were yet to receive their 'Aadhar-card' (a unique-identity-card for Indians), the card that is supposed to provide 'support' to the receiver (in terms of facilities yet to be fully known as of going to the press).

I had undergone through the entire procedure along-with necessary paperwork for 'Aadhar-card', 18-months ago on 13/08/2011 to be specific...Got the proof having done it.

Six of my family members 'enjoyed' a 'forced-leave' from 'work-day'. They stood in a long-queue that is typical of an  inefficient office to get certificates, cards, refunds, etc. 'Enjoyed' because theiIr website was full of entertainment in the form of fun-filled notifications on delays such as traffic-jams, system-failures, staff-shortage, etc.

All my family members received the card except me although going through the procedure bumper-to-bumper one-after-the-other.

I repeatedly checked 'status' of the card on department's website only to receive a message: "Sorry! we could not find Item Number in our System for this EID Number".

Since no one in their brick-n-mortar centers knew 'what to do in such cases', a couple of months ago I wrote to their HELPLINE 'help@uidai.gov.in' with all details for 'the needful'.

I  waited for a reply like waiting for a TOLL-FREE number attendant to answer back. Sometimes I wonder whether the auto-reply, toll-free, etc. kind of technologies are deliberately used to keep a customer away. Or may be waiting is due to staff on-line at both places were busy in attending people in queues at their brick-n-mortar centers. On-line or in-line,  in any case waiting is the common denominator. 

Today as though to compensate for an other extreme  experience (a 'satisfactory customer experience' that I had at other place) I had to stand in a long-queue at one of their brick-n-mortar 'Aadhar-card' centers to inquire my fate.

The girl at the center replied they might have lost the data. An example of how technology can be a 'boon' sometimes and can be a 'curse' sometimes!

She asked me to 'stand in a queue early morning at 7am' after 8-days so as to 'get a token and a date'... Then 'stand in a queue' again 'with token' on the given date alongwith papers for 'rework to get the card reissued. 

The question is why on-line systems do not work (in a country that teaches software to the world)?
Why can't they issue tokens on-line?
Why should the customers 'Mer' (die off extra eefforts) or why 'rework' of the suppliers forced upon them?

Of yes, I got the answer.

I was wrong in presuming myself to be a customer. Actually, I was a supplier of tax money to government. How can a supplier expect better treatment than this one. At most I was a Custo-Mer (कष्ट-मर).

So I nodded to the girl's suggestions agreeing to eagerly wait in their 'fun-filled queues'.

I hope the 'rework' does the 'work' this time.

25th September 2013 dawns! 

On reading the news that "Don't worry, Aadhaar is not mandatory for now" in DNA, I am back again on this blogpost after 5-months. 

In April, I had reworked the procedure as above to obtain the Adhaar-card second time. At the center I was told that the card will be delivered within a couple of weeks. On logging in to check status of my card, I got message on screen saying "Your card is under construction".

So the 'rework' department was yet to do work. While I kept my fingers crossed, I came across a few fuming tweets as in picture herebelow. 

With the "Don't worry" news in DNA, individually I may not be worried. But as an Indian the same news did worry me.

Because although with Aadhar-card, Indians seemed to be happy thinking they got Aadhar (support) Bangla-Paki infiltrators got nir-Aadhar (making availing of illegal benefits difficult to them). The news thus negated the latter. 

Where do we Indians look for Aadhar (support) now? Any tips? 

Do you keep curing your brand?

I requested telephone company to shift one of my landlines to my old house. It took one week for them to respond.

On 'the' day of shifting, I told their lineman about the instrument being defective: "Sometimes outgoing calls couldn't be made". As usual the reply was "instruments in short-supply". Having heard similar replies in past, I had installed a cordless anyway.

"I would appreciate if you please try (to test) a few from your go-down  You might get a good one in the dump there if I am lucky": without any expectations very politely I made a request to the govt employee.

Next day I was 'awestruck'. I saw the lineman in front of me with the instrument without any followup.

When did you last have a WOW experience like that?

For me it was 'one of it's kind delight' experienced over a past few months.

In a high-mistrust society, where "I will meet you at 9'O-clock" promise might mean 9 a.m. or 9 p.m. or whatever the '9' means to the parties concerned, there are more chances of you getting 'awfully struck' than 'awestruck with a WOW'.

Although spiritual person in you may look for a positive awe even in an awful experience, in practical business sense what does one expect: A product to perform to it's specifications just as one would expect a person to perform his duty and fulfill his promise.

In real life, past experience about a product or a person does stay in mind making one knowledgeable about what/who does or do not fulfill a promise consistently and reliably.

To me such an 'experience' full of intangible feelings and associations created along-with it's delivered-tangibles is the 'brand experience'. And corresponding 'expectations' created in the mind of customer that linger longer is the 'brand image'.

Conventionally, a brand is recognized by a bundle of it's tangibles and intangibles delivered consistently over a period of time. The American Marketing Association defines brand as a name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller's good or service as distinct from those of other sellers ... A brand may identify one item, a family of items, or all items of that seller.

Companies do spend a lot of money and efforts on 'building a brand' but most of it on building it 'externally'. They spend a fortune on choosing 'right' name for the brand , an 'attractive' logo, 'look and feel' of the offering itself and that of the POS (point-of-sale) outfits.

Above all, apart from 'being' on multimedia and on eye-catching hoardings, etc., 'the brand ambassador as well as CEO' spends precious time on promoting it. Companies also ensure appointment of a consultant, a dedicated team, a marketing plan and budget for it.

Coming back to my experience in the telephone case, 'brand image of the person' who delivered telephone service appeared to be good at least on that particular day. Brand image of the telephone/service/company however was in general far below-standard. May be so because a system was not in place to make such 'good' experience repeatable in their day-to-day operations. In fact, the damage is so severe that it's beyond cure although it is still above water with gas-supply from 'motherly' government.

In short, with the help of marketing-efforts a brand may get born in the mind-space of a current and/or prospective customer. But in order that it 'lives (there) happily ever after', operations discipline plays a major role in maintaining it without which 'external marketing' to augment it's 'look and feel' stays superficial. Without improved-operations-combined-with-hearty-smile at each of it's touch-points in the process of delivery internal as well as external, it is like being indifferent to deliver customer's real needs, expectations on quality and differentiated experience.

I had not tried an augmented food-dish until the counter-boy at a fast-food-joint educated me on it the other day with a genuine smile. It was 'available' on the menu-card all these days. But it was not well-communicated. So it did not result into business due to ineffective communication. The dish did not go beyond staying on the shelf just as it did not go beyond at-most staying in the peripheral vision of the customer.

Marketing may move an offer to customer's mind-shelf but operations must move it off-the-shelf. Indifference by anyone in the chain thus is a sure way to 'kill a brand' each moment a customer is in 'touch' with it's unsatisfactory experience.

If you go by a finding that "every dissatisfied customer 'bad-mouths' a brand to at least ten prospective buyers", you will know for yourself whose speed will be higher; that of  the CEO promoting/building the brand or that of the dissatisfied customer destroying it.

Satisfying customer's eye-balls may bring him to water once but not often and surely not force him to drink it. Brand is not about 'showing' to his eye senses a couple of times & 'leaving' it at that. Brand is about 'leaving a lovely and lively experience pleasing customer's senses' and 'living it each-day-each-time throughout it's lifetime' at 'each of it's touch-points' right from the moment a prospective customer conceives a need and begins researching for purchase and then finally disposing it off post-it's-use.

I still remember the first Indian 3-D movie: Chotta-Chetan, for the snake that I felt 'touching' my feet forcing me to fearfully coil in the seat. Hundreds of other people in the theater wearing an embarrassed smile with special 3-D spectacles on them 'experienced' the same. Not only production and marketing of the film was excellent, but also the operations that perhaps blew an air-draft under the seat that created a lasting 'touch' effect. Anyway, the success was evident in terms of huge box office collection of around Rs 60 crore during 1984-85 and 50 crore on it's re-release (1998). The film that won President's Gold Medal created a no-disposal 'recall'.

Brand is about a customer feeling it, smelling-eating-drinking it, talking about it, dreaming it, and in-short breathing it with a lasting 'recall' as an advocate in front of other prospective customers.

Successful brand building is perhaps more about doing creative 'internal marketing' so that 'internal customers' as suppliers 'live it': smell-eat-drink it, feel it, talk about it, dream it. In fact, they even 'breath it' in terms of putting their 'heart and soul' while 'caring to make' the corresponding offering 'lovely and lively' for the external customers to truly experience it like done by the 3-D movie.

Branding is about 'Living' it, not 'Show'ing & 'Leaving' it at that!