Competence Also Required
The other day a colleague told me that he had recently upgraded his mother’s computer capabilities to make it easier for her to Skype with her adult children and their families. But after getting set up with a brand new laptop, his mom complained to him about a jumpy signal that made video connections difficult and even interrupted the audio occasionally, as well.
After some investigation, he learned what had apparently happened when his mother contacted her cable TV company to get an internet connection set up was that the representative had asked her how much she used the computer to go online. “Not much,” she replied, so as a service to the customer the rep suggested the low-price internet option, which turned out to be a data speed insufficient to support a Skype call.
To earn the trust of a customer you have to (1) have good intentions, and (2) be competent. And my colleague's story about his mother provides a great example of good intentions defeated by a lack of competence. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a situation that’s been repeated many times with other customers of this cable company.
Saving a customer money provides no benefit if the customer’s need isn’t met in the first place. In this case, the well-intentioned cable rep simply wasn’t trained to inquire deeply enough into the way a new customer is likely to use their connection.
So, if you want your company to benefit from customer trust, ask yourself two questions:
- Do we always try to act in the customer’s interest?
- Have we designed our processes to ensure we know what the customer's interest really is?
Photo credit: Daria Filimonova/Shutterstock.com
Customer experience expert, keynote speaker, business author, Founder of Peppers & Rogers Group
11yRaymon A, I can definitely appreciate your point of view, and no one can truly know what really happened during the conversation. I am not admonishing the rep for being incompetent, however. I am admonishing the company for failing to train reps in a better way to inquire of a customer's needs. That's all. Would definitely not fault the cable company for its good intentions - saving the customer money - but even with the best of intentions, my point is that a company also has to be competent at sussing out what a customer actually needs (as opposed to just what the customer says).
Owner/Partner, O2 Marketing Communications
11yWe've pulled so many clients back from the abyss. One constant is that we try never to allow our clients to insist on knee jerk marketing. We've saved them $$ and loyalty.
Eng/Product Talent Partner | Computer Science @ OSU
11ySeems like much of what I had to say/ask was addressed in the comments section. I should've considered reading those before writing.
Eng/Product Talent Partner | Computer Science @ OSU
11yI agree with your points here, Don. However, while reading I realized some missing details that might offer a new perspective on the situation, and therefore more to explore on this topic of customer trust/interests and company competence. The anecdote you used here is not my focus, although I will use it to point out the oversight I see in this article. As readers we are disconnected from the customer representative you admonish ultimately as lacking in competence. I feel this is because we experience the story from your colleague's point of view: he tells you the story, he upgraded his mother's computer, he wanted to Skype, he investigated, he called the cable company, he learned what "apparently happened." But what actually happened can only be told by your colleague's mother and the customer representative who helped her on that first call. You take for granted that the customer representative lacked competence and the insight into the customer's needs/interests. Perhaps that assumption comes with a "the customer is always right" mentality, I don't know. But I wonder if this is what happened during that initial call between mom and the cable provider: Mom called; representative offered standard package that meets the bandwidth demand of today's info-/internet-based society; Mom said, "Too expensive. Plus, I don't use the computer very often -- because I'm elderly"; representative then offered low-price internet option; Mom loved price and perhaps even trusted the representative for not trying to meet company demand over her personal needs. For the assumptions you made, I agree with your points completely. Without a doubt, customer interest is paramount, as it is a company's foundation. However, what of these opposite or different assumptions: That we are now dealing with customers who have interests (plural), but have one that trumps all others -- saving money. So, while a fully capable and competent representative may attempt to act in a customer's interests (using the processes established by the company to determine those interests), the customer often times acts against the well-intentioned approach. What then, Don? I don't know if those customers are the majority, but I'd appreciate your thoughts on how to navigate trust where there is customer incompetence (or lack of interest) and company competence.
Vice President, Dahl-Morrow International, Global Executive Search
11yOur business is dependent upon knowing what our client needs and then acting in their best interest - otherwise, we won't keep them as a client.