In
what is a slightly longer than usual article I want you to consider two very
different models of providing a helpdesk service to customers, and consider the
relative merits of each at satisfying customer needs and exceeding customer
expectations.
ABC CO LTD
At
ABC Co Ltd it is a requirement that all uses of their products attend a FREE
training course on how to use it. The first aim of improving customer services
is surely to ensure that they don’t need it!
Anyone
who has been on a course can ask for help, but don’t bother trying to make a
helpdesk call if you haven’t had any training or haven’t asked someone who has.
The second aim must be to discourage pointless calls which could be resolved by
reference to the training material or consulting a colleague.
Getting
people to attend training is rather like sheepherding cats, so ABC Co Ltd
say the first course is FREE but if you want more there is a charge for that.
By insisting only people who have attended training can make calls this further
adds value to attending the training.
People
seldom value anything that is free, and often will abuse the generosity of the
provider. Unless your product is truly broken most calls are from people who
can’t be bothered to help themselves and calling you is the first option not
the last resort. You don’t necessarily want to prevent them from
picking-up the phone, but you do want them to pause for thought first!
Putting
a nominal fee on follow-up training and making a pre-requisite of service is a
triple-whammy:
1.
it encourages
people to attend training.
2.
it creates
revenue from those that don’t.
3.
it resolves
many problems at source by educating the user.
When
ABC Co Ltd do pick-up the call they first identify the user and problem and
resolves to have an expert call them back within a short period (well within
the SLA) .
This
is a significant difference from XYZ Ltd (which we will look at further,
later). XYZ Ltd will attempt to resolve the problem right there and then,
demonstrating to the customer the value of an on-demand service.
ABC
Co Ltd places someone on first response whose key skill is empathetic rather
than technical. Their role is first to address the needs of the, sometimes distressed,
user and then to elicit the information which will help identify the best
person and quickest route to resolve the problem. They then check a convenient
time for the user to receive a call from the expert. This is helpful because
many users are in the middle of something or on their way to somewhere when the
need to make a call and (obviously) don’t have the current moment scheduled in
their diary to talk to a technician.
The
benefits of this are manifold.
1. The user can generally get
on with something else whilst a solution is being sought;
2. The highly skilled
technicians are focussed on solving problems rather than answering calls;
3. The technicians can also
specialise, and rely upon first response to recognise and route the calls
appropriately
4. The first response person
can better focus on the person rather than the problem, and both calm and guide
and support the person to providing the information which will expedite a
solution to be delivered by the appropriate expert.
A COMPARISON
TO EMERGENCY SERVICES
Consider
for one moment a super 999 or 911 service which rather than route your call to
Fire, Police, Ambulance, Coast-Guard, (or Vehicle Recovery Service) instead
insisted that you were speaking to someone who had all the skills and
experience of all the above.
Would
you believe them?
As
a user you might be sceptical how the humble operator at the end of the line
could have all these skills, on-demand and without reference to anyone else.
If
any organisation does provide such a comprehensive service, I would be
interested on how they identify recruit, train, remunerate and retain such
expertise and then persuade them to sit patiently by the phone.
BACK TO ABC
CO LTD
By
making the customer wait (for 20mins or what-ever the SLA is) ABC Co Ltd is
achieving three things.
1. They are creating an
opportunity for the user to think “…err, actually if its 20min I think I can
fix this…” and thus nullify pointless calls.
2. Once they realise the
standard response that someone will call back in 20 minutes they may think
before they dial, possibly referring to documentation or a colleague before
making a call.
3. They are creating an
opportunity for the technical expert to think, refer to a knowledge base or
colleague and thus be better informed and prepared before attempting a fix.
Hopefully
if the product or service is any good resolving the issue should be straight
forward. If the call transpired to relate to training issues this is
logged and when sufficient similar issues are noted ABC Co Ltd will suggest to
the client that refresher training would be wise.
If,
as happens often, the call for support relates to something other than ABC Co’s
product or service (eg advise on someone else’s product or service (because
your helpdesk is nicer or cheaper than theirs!) then this too is logged and if
it gets out of hand ABC Co will either sell training (prevention) or charge for
support (cure). This way the operation whilst flexible and friendly doesn’t
become a unsustainable charity which will inevitably fail the needs of both
customer and provider.
COMPARISON TO
XYZ LTD
As
noted above XYZ Ltd prides itself on rapid response providing on-demand
solutions.
They
don’t provide training, but will provide telephone support providing there is a
happy coincidence between the needs of the caller and, by random selection, the
knowledge of the person answering the call.
For
the expert or technician picking up the call, this is more a game of Russian
Roulette than an opportunity to exploit a particular expertise that you have
honed.
Often
the expert or technician is more focussed on the problem than the person which
may affect their demeanour and rapport [ an essential element of customer
service] and this may be made worse if their disposition is dependent on
whether the telephone Russian Roulette has yielded a harmless click or a skull
crunching BANG!
At
this point the technician may be relieved and confident, or surprised and
stressed by the revelations coming down the phone line. In the worse
circumstances they will have to juggle satisfying the emotional needs of the
caller and resolve the technical need of the problem all, if possible,
right-first-time.
This
is not impossible. I have seen some remarkable people be both customer focussed
and technically brilliant, however their scarcity is what makes them
remarkable!
The
above, perhaps, doesn't give XYZ a reasonable case even though XYZ (probably)
represents the industry standard.
I
would concede that the XYZ model can work where there is low variety of
products and service requests. Clearly if there only 2 or 3 products or 2 of 3
request types then expecting the person at the end of the phone to have
reasonable expertise on-demand isn’t unreasonable. This then necessitates a
strict approach to standardise and streamline.
Going
back to our previous analogy it is rather like calling the Vehicle Recovery
Service. If you call the AA, RAC or Green Flag you can reasonably expect them
to know something about cars, engines and possible causes for breakdowns. It
would however be unreasonable to expect them to opine on car accessories,
holiday destinations or indeed provide driving lessons.
FEEDBACK
What
is interesting about ABC and XYZ is that I can name at least 4 companies for
each model and I am curious as to which is actually better. I personally think
ABC is better (and I acknowledge some bias in this article) but I am interested
in others’ opinions, experience and possibly other models.
I
would especially welcome feedback from customers who are the recipients of
these services and organisations who need to recruit, train and retain the
people that provide them.
As
always, feedback welcome.
If
you are in Jersey (Channel Islands) I am always willing to share a coffee,
croissant and chat about your ideas and experiences.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Tim
Rogers is a Qualified Change Practitioner and PRINCE2 Project Manager, with an
MBA in Management Consultancy. Past projects have included the incorporation of
Ports of Jersey and Operations Change and Sales Support for RBSI and NatWest.
He is a tutor/lecturer for the Chartered Management Institute.
