I'm really impressed by the development company that I recently bought an investment property from, Mosaic Homes.
First of all, they did a good job. The quality of construction is great, the development is well designed, most of the project was completed on schedule...
And they also seem to understand the concept of customer service. They see the value in building trust and a good reputation.
For example, they've been extremely accommodating with any requests for repairs or adjustments to the property since purchasing it -- all those little things that are technically covered by the warranty, but that they could probably make excuses about and try to get out of fixing.
They've also been very good at proactively keeping in touch. During construction and after, it wasn't unusual to receive little thank you cards and updates ("Don't worry about all the flooding concerns in the news lately. Here's some info from our surveyors..."). Two weeks ago, the strata held their first AGM and not only did several representatives from Mosaic participate, but they also treated the owners to a few snacks and beverages afterwards.
All of these are nice touches and, really, they're things that every company should be doing for its valued customers. But in this case I'm particularly impressed because there's not much direct, financial benefit to doing so. Very few of the property owners will be buying another place anytime soon. There's really not much chance of gaining repeat business, and therefore little need for "retention" or "loyalty" efforts.
But... they get it. They recognize that the handful of us who will be buying again will probably seriously consider other developments by the same company. They recognize that it's important to build a general consensus that "Mosaic is a good company to work with" in the marketplace and within their own industry. They know that people talk. They know that bad vibes can be as dangerous to a company as an actual, tangible mistake can be.
So, if this company has figured it out, why do so many others - especially those that actually have a direct, financial incentive to build long-term customer relationships - fail to do so?
Okay, I'm sure they make a fairly good profit on each property the sell. So it's not a big deal, financially, for them to take these extra steps. But since when has "we can't afford that" been the only obstacle to doing the right thing?
My guess is that most companies just can't be bothered. Too many are run by accountants and analysts who can't get their minds past the potential (or lack thereof) for immediate, obvious, direct returns. They see "customer service" as a necessary expense to put out fires, not as an opportunity to invest in gaining new business or extending a customer relationship.
Showing posts with label setting expectations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label setting expectations. Show all posts
Friday, May 2, 2008
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Not Right or Wrong, Just Smart
Had an example this morning of the difference between a "professional" businessperson and someone who just runs (or works at) a business.
In a nutshell, we got ripped off -- bought a little coupon book a few weeks ago, went to use a coupon for Sunday brunch today and was told by the restaurant staff that our coupon was a fake.
Now, we don't doubt that the restaurant is being honest. They probably aren't just trying to get out of honouring the coupons.
But, their reaction could have been better.
They said: "Sorry about that. Write down your name and number though, because we're working with the police and we should be able to get you compensation."
They should have said: "Sorry about that. Tell you what, we'll honour the coupon, since it's not your fault that this is a fake. But, we'll have to confiscate the coupon book. Give us your name and number and we'll try to get you reimbursement for the original cost of the book."
Even with the coupon, the restaurant is probably still making a net profit on our purchase. If not, it was at least an effective loss-leader to get us in the door. (If the offer is too rich to honour now, why was it okay earlier, even with the cost of the coupon book?).
Regardless of how the restaurant was impacted by the actions of the third-party that sold the coupons illegitimately, the business has just lost most, if not all, of the positive impression they had made on us until that point.
It doesn't matter who's fault it is; it matters whose customer it is.
In a nutshell, we got ripped off -- bought a little coupon book a few weeks ago, went to use a coupon for Sunday brunch today and was told by the restaurant staff that our coupon was a fake.
Now, we don't doubt that the restaurant is being honest. They probably aren't just trying to get out of honouring the coupons.
But, their reaction could have been better.
They said: "Sorry about that. Write down your name and number though, because we're working with the police and we should be able to get you compensation."
They should have said: "Sorry about that. Tell you what, we'll honour the coupon, since it's not your fault that this is a fake. But, we'll have to confiscate the coupon book. Give us your name and number and we'll try to get you reimbursement for the original cost of the book."
Even with the coupon, the restaurant is probably still making a net profit on our purchase. If not, it was at least an effective loss-leader to get us in the door. (If the offer is too rich to honour now, why was it okay earlier, even with the cost of the coupon book?).
Regardless of how the restaurant was impacted by the actions of the third-party that sold the coupons illegitimately, the business has just lost most, if not all, of the positive impression they had made on us until that point.
It doesn't matter who's fault it is; it matters whose customer it is.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
No I Didn't
There's a bus bench ad near my house. It just has a simple photo (a stock image of an overly excited person, if I remember correctly) and a line of text with a phone number. It says "You just proved that advertising works!"
Obviously, the logic is that noticing and reading the ad means success.
Sadly, the majority of "marketers" probably think this is true.
To anyone who bothers to think about it, though, it's obviously nonsense.
Using the ad as its own example:
I'm in the marketing field. In fact, buying media is one of the main things that I do. I should be the perfect audience for the ad's message. If it really worked, I should have called the advertiser by now. At the very least, I should have remembered the phone number. Or gained some appreciation for the sophisticated elegance and tactical genius of putting commercial messages on bus benches.
Instead, I think no more positively about it than I did in the past. I'm no more aware of bench advertising than I was before driving past.
That same "You just proved..." message has been there for months, so I can only assume that nobody else has been sufficiently impressed to book that space either.
I won't belabor the point. It's simply that "Awareness is not enough". Even the old Marketing 101 "A.I.D.A." model recognizes this.
Along with the bus bench, I noticed a few other things the last time I drove down that stretch of road: some road kill and an abandoned car in the ditch (unrelated, I assume) come to mind. Did I "...just prove that roadkill and stalled cars work!" too?
Obviously, the logic is that noticing and reading the ad means success.
Sadly, the majority of "marketers" probably think this is true.
To anyone who bothers to think about it, though, it's obviously nonsense.
Using the ad as its own example:
I'm in the marketing field. In fact, buying media is one of the main things that I do. I should be the perfect audience for the ad's message. If it really worked, I should have called the advertiser by now. At the very least, I should have remembered the phone number. Or gained some appreciation for the sophisticated elegance and tactical genius of putting commercial messages on bus benches.
Instead, I think no more positively about it than I did in the past. I'm no more aware of bench advertising than I was before driving past.
That same "You just proved..." message has been there for months, so I can only assume that nobody else has been sufficiently impressed to book that space either.
I won't belabor the point. It's simply that "Awareness is not enough". Even the old Marketing 101 "A.I.D.A." model recognizes this.
Along with the bus bench, I noticed a few other things the last time I drove down that stretch of road: some road kill and an abandoned car in the ditch (unrelated, I assume) come to mind. Did I "...just prove that roadkill and stalled cars work!" too?
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Government Forms
Why do governments and "official" bodies have to make their paperwork so painful?
I understand that legal requirements need to be met, but can't a significant portion of the big words and explanations associated with those be put into an appendix or something?
Why not use plain English?
Why not simply give instructions that say, essentially:
A. Do this...
B. Then do this...
C. Then put this here...
D. And finish up with this...
Why not hire a designer to clarify big documents, adding some colour or shading or boxes or other elements to help make things clear?
Why not do a review of a user's "flow" through the process and try to clean up the usability?
It certainly doesn't seem like they've done anything like this.
(If they have, the people doing it need to be fired immediately).
Maybe the government doesn't care too much, since they don't see us as "customers". We have no choice but to go through them, so why bother putting effort into making the experience somewhat comfortable?
It seems obvious, though, that there must be an enormous number of avoidable errors in the various documents and forms that they process. Plus, aren't they human beings (okay, maybe not the politicians or some of the drones working in the offices, but at least a few people there must be decent) and have some basic desire to simply not be hated? So, on both a practical (cost and effort-saving) and emotional (being friendly and helpful) level, every organization could benefit from just being a bit more clear and usable.
I understand that legal requirements need to be met, but can't a significant portion of the big words and explanations associated with those be put into an appendix or something?
Why not use plain English?
Why not simply give instructions that say, essentially:
A. Do this...
B. Then do this...
C. Then put this here...
D. And finish up with this...
Why not hire a designer to clarify big documents, adding some colour or shading or boxes or other elements to help make things clear?
Why not do a review of a user's "flow" through the process and try to clean up the usability?
It certainly doesn't seem like they've done anything like this.
(If they have, the people doing it need to be fired immediately).
Maybe the government doesn't care too much, since they don't see us as "customers". We have no choice but to go through them, so why bother putting effort into making the experience somewhat comfortable?
It seems obvious, though, that there must be an enormous number of avoidable errors in the various documents and forms that they process. Plus, aren't they human beings (okay, maybe not the politicians or some of the drones working in the offices, but at least a few people there must be decent) and have some basic desire to simply not be hated? So, on both a practical (cost and effort-saving) and emotional (being friendly and helpful) level, every organization could benefit from just being a bit more clear and usable.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
First and Last Notes
One day, I'll get around to chronicling the ridiculous customer experience situation I went through when buying a new jetted bathtub for our house.
For now, let me summarize by saying that it took over six months before I actually received the correct product in working order and was able to install it.
In the end, blame for the various problems fell on both the tub manufacturer and the retailer I bought it from. Problems included the "local" warranty repair person being located about three hours away, the wrong products being either ordered or shipped (I'm still not sure which was the case) several times, product arriving in broken condition, and slow responses from the companies involved, and an and on.
Finally, though, the right thing was delivered in proper condition. Obviously, we weren't too happy about the delays and problems. Because of the various issues we were out of pocket for related materials that we could no longer use, we were without the use of a bathroom for months, we lost a lot of storage space holding other construction materials for the room, and we spent countless hours on the phone, traveling too and from the store, waiting for delivery people, etc.
Anyways, before I end up writing the whole tale, here's my point: I still like the retailer, but I will never buy from the manufacturer again.
I think I'd be justified in disliking both parties equally. But, the difference came down to treating me properly and fairly.
The retailer was always responsive (if a bit slow) to our concerns. In the end, they compensated us financially for the problems. They didn't hesitate to try to make things write. They spent I-don't-know-how-much on deliveries (which they normally charge for), picking up broken tubs, and other extra expenditures.
The manufacturer, on the other hand, hasn't even bothered to contact me to apologize or check that everything worked out alright. Now, normally I wouldn't expect them to do anything-- the retailer is the intermediary after all. But in this case:
a.) The product comes with a very clear message in the instructions to contact the manufacturer directly if there are any problems.
and
b.) The small amount of contact I did have with the manufacturer and their representatives early on in the process was poor.
Back in elementary school, our music teacher would drill into us the importance of hitting the first and last notes of a song perfectly, because that's what the audience will remember most.
Same thing goes here. I remember the manufacturer bumbling early on, and I remember the retailer helping us out at the end. And its meant the difference between keeping or losing me (and anyone I tell about this) as a valuable customer -- the only difference that really matters in marketing.
For now, let me summarize by saying that it took over six months before I actually received the correct product in working order and was able to install it.
In the end, blame for the various problems fell on both the tub manufacturer and the retailer I bought it from. Problems included the "local" warranty repair person being located about three hours away, the wrong products being either ordered or shipped (I'm still not sure which was the case) several times, product arriving in broken condition, and slow responses from the companies involved, and an and on.
Finally, though, the right thing was delivered in proper condition. Obviously, we weren't too happy about the delays and problems. Because of the various issues we were out of pocket for related materials that we could no longer use, we were without the use of a bathroom for months, we lost a lot of storage space holding other construction materials for the room, and we spent countless hours on the phone, traveling too and from the store, waiting for delivery people, etc.
Anyways, before I end up writing the whole tale, here's my point: I still like the retailer, but I will never buy from the manufacturer again.
I think I'd be justified in disliking both parties equally. But, the difference came down to treating me properly and fairly.
The retailer was always responsive (if a bit slow) to our concerns. In the end, they compensated us financially for the problems. They didn't hesitate to try to make things write. They spent I-don't-know-how-much on deliveries (which they normally charge for), picking up broken tubs, and other extra expenditures.
The manufacturer, on the other hand, hasn't even bothered to contact me to apologize or check that everything worked out alright. Now, normally I wouldn't expect them to do anything-- the retailer is the intermediary after all. But in this case:
a.) The product comes with a very clear message in the instructions to contact the manufacturer directly if there are any problems.
and
b.) The small amount of contact I did have with the manufacturer and their representatives early on in the process was poor.
Back in elementary school, our music teacher would drill into us the importance of hitting the first and last notes of a song perfectly, because that's what the audience will remember most.
Same thing goes here. I remember the manufacturer bumbling early on, and I remember the retailer helping us out at the end. And its meant the difference between keeping or losing me (and anyone I tell about this) as a valuable customer -- the only difference that really matters in marketing.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Take Your Pick: Lose A Few Bucks or Lose A Customer (and your reputation)
What is with companies that would rather squeeze a few extra pennies out of a customer than keep that customer happy?
A few personal examples:
I'm going to Hawaii for a friend's wedding in a few months. For a variety of reasons, they had to change the hotel we would all be staying at. I had booked a room at the initial hotel through a service called BookIt.com (no link, because they don't deserve any traffic from me).
Here's the cancellation policy as it appeared in the reservation confirmation e-mail I received:
"No Penalty if cancelled before Jul 24, 2008 Lose 1 Nights Room & Tax if cancelled on or after Jul 24, 2008"
Great. This was part of the reason we felt so comfortable booking so far in advance.
But guess what they told us about when we tried to cancel due to the hotel change...
Yup, hidden in the small print is a contradictory statement:
"All cancellations are subject to cancellation fees ranging from $19.95."
Okaaaay... I assume they can get away with this because they define "penalty" differently than they define "fees". But, whatever, it's still deceptive. Basically, the "No Penalty..." line is nice and prominent in all their materials, but the "...subject t cancellation fees..." line is hard to find even if you know it's there.
But ethically questionable behaviour aside, what really bugged me is that we had to fight to get the $19.95 fee waived.
The dumbest parts:
1. We would have gladly re-booked through the same service for the replacement hotel.
2. The cancellation was made within just a couple of days of the booking. The credit card deposit hadn't even been processed yet.
3. The wedding party isn't huge, but we still account for several rooms. You'd think this would earn us some respect if nothing else.
4. We spent quite a while on their 1-800 arguing with their call centre rep.
Perhaps realizing that I could simply cancel the credit card transaction, they finally relented and gave the full refund without a fee (or penalty or charge or whatever they want to call it).
As a result of their actions and attitude they:
a.) Lost me as a customer. Not just for this trip but for any trip in the future.
b.) Lost the others in the wedding party as potential future customers.
c.) Probably spent more than the $19.95 fee in call centre costs.
d.) Guaranteed that I'll remember the poor experience and will tell everyone I can not to deal with bookit.com
Another example:
I'm a customer of Citizens Bank and have been very happy with them. Strong and ethical brand, good customer service, good interest rates, low fees...
My wife has had an account with a local credit union her entire life, and even though we're gradually consolidating all of our accounts, she was hoping to keep an account open with her credit union.
Seeing that our joint account at Citizens was earning a very nice rate of interest and had no monthly fees, noted that her credit union account was actually costing her money each month and wanted to see if they (the credit union) could address this. She had only a handful of transactions in a typical month, but had a fairly healthy amount of savings sitting in the account. But, she was earning a pitiful interest rate and had to pay ridiculous fees for even her minuscule account activity.
When she approached them looking for a more reasonable fee structure or better interest rate, they seemed to forget that:
a.) She could easily transfer all of her business elsewhere
and
b.) She had been a lifelong customer and could be retained quite easily
Long story short(er), they wouldn't budge, despite the above simple facts. So, she's now left them entirely and has no intention of going back.
Even if all might have earned off her in the future was one loan or mortgage or RRSP, etc. the profit from that would have easily covered what they lost in monthly fees.
Maybe in both cases it's simply a case of frontline workers not having the authority or knowledge to recognize and react appropriately to situations like this. But it seems much more systemic.
So my question is simply: Why would ANY brand make the conscious decision to lose (and annoy and alienate) a customer for the sake of just a few dollars?
I'll end on a positive note:
My wife also recently tried to renegotiate her cell phone plan. She's been been a customer of TELUS for many many years. Her family were extremely early adopters of mobile phones and have been with TELUS the entire time.
After a mediocre experience with one independent dealer, she spoke with another dealer who then passed her over to the phone company directly. They recognized her history with them, saw that she could be retained as a strong customer with minimal effort, and immediately did whatever it took to match or beat anything the competition was offering. Needless to say, she's still with them. Sure, maybe they're missing out on a few dollars each month, but there's a very good chance she would have switched to a competitor if they weren't willing to budge -- perhaps just out of principle. Just as importantly, though, she remains an advocate for TELUS. If they hadn't treated her right, though, it's quite possible she would be telling all sorts of people how TELUS has gone downhill lately and really let her down...
A few personal examples:
I'm going to Hawaii for a friend's wedding in a few months. For a variety of reasons, they had to change the hotel we would all be staying at. I had booked a room at the initial hotel through a service called BookIt.com (no link, because they don't deserve any traffic from me).
Here's the cancellation policy as it appeared in the reservation confirmation e-mail I received:
"No Penalty if cancelled before Jul 24, 2008 Lose 1 Nights Room & Tax if cancelled on or after Jul 24, 2008"
Great. This was part of the reason we felt so comfortable booking so far in advance.
But guess what they told us about when we tried to cancel due to the hotel change...
Yup, hidden in the small print is a contradictory statement:
"All cancellations are subject to cancellation fees ranging from $19.95."
Okaaaay... I assume they can get away with this because they define "penalty" differently than they define "fees". But, whatever, it's still deceptive. Basically, the "No Penalty..." line is nice and prominent in all their materials, but the "...subject t cancellation fees..." line is hard to find even if you know it's there.
But ethically questionable behaviour aside, what really bugged me is that we had to fight to get the $19.95 fee waived.
The dumbest parts:
1. We would have gladly re-booked through the same service for the replacement hotel.
2. The cancellation was made within just a couple of days of the booking. The credit card deposit hadn't even been processed yet.
3. The wedding party isn't huge, but we still account for several rooms. You'd think this would earn us some respect if nothing else.
4. We spent quite a while on their 1-800 arguing with their call centre rep.
Perhaps realizing that I could simply cancel the credit card transaction, they finally relented and gave the full refund without a fee (or penalty or charge or whatever they want to call it).
As a result of their actions and attitude they:
a.) Lost me as a customer. Not just for this trip but for any trip in the future.
b.) Lost the others in the wedding party as potential future customers.
c.) Probably spent more than the $19.95 fee in call centre costs.
d.) Guaranteed that I'll remember the poor experience and will tell everyone I can not to deal with bookit.com
Another example:
I'm a customer of Citizens Bank and have been very happy with them. Strong and ethical brand, good customer service, good interest rates, low fees...
My wife has had an account with a local credit union her entire life, and even though we're gradually consolidating all of our accounts, she was hoping to keep an account open with her credit union.
Seeing that our joint account at Citizens was earning a very nice rate of interest and had no monthly fees, noted that her credit union account was actually costing her money each month and wanted to see if they (the credit union) could address this. She had only a handful of transactions in a typical month, but had a fairly healthy amount of savings sitting in the account. But, she was earning a pitiful interest rate and had to pay ridiculous fees for even her minuscule account activity.
When she approached them looking for a more reasonable fee structure or better interest rate, they seemed to forget that:
a.) She could easily transfer all of her business elsewhere
and
b.) She had been a lifelong customer and could be retained quite easily
Long story short(er), they wouldn't budge, despite the above simple facts. So, she's now left them entirely and has no intention of going back.
Even if all might have earned off her in the future was one loan or mortgage or RRSP, etc. the profit from that would have easily covered what they lost in monthly fees.
Maybe in both cases it's simply a case of frontline workers not having the authority or knowledge to recognize and react appropriately to situations like this. But it seems much more systemic.
So my question is simply: Why would ANY brand make the conscious decision to lose (and annoy and alienate) a customer for the sake of just a few dollars?
I'll end on a positive note:
My wife also recently tried to renegotiate her cell phone plan. She's been been a customer of TELUS for many many years. Her family were extremely early adopters of mobile phones and have been with TELUS the entire time.
After a mediocre experience with one independent dealer, she spoke with another dealer who then passed her over to the phone company directly. They recognized her history with them, saw that she could be retained as a strong customer with minimal effort, and immediately did whatever it took to match or beat anything the competition was offering. Needless to say, she's still with them. Sure, maybe they're missing out on a few dollars each month, but there's a very good chance she would have switched to a competitor if they weren't willing to budge -- perhaps just out of principle. Just as importantly, though, she remains an advocate for TELUS. If they hadn't treated her right, though, it's quite possible she would be telling all sorts of people how TELUS has gone downhill lately and really let her down...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
