Through the Eyes of the Customer: Trust & Transparency

Trust & Transparency

01/23/2015

Hire people you're willing to trust. Then trust them.

I called my bank the other day to ask them to reverse a service charge. Technically, the charge was my fault. But given the details of the situation, I felt I had a good case for waiving the fee. My optimistic self thought I'd spend a few minutes explaining the case to a customer service rep, before pleading my case to a supervisor.

Much to my delight, the customer service rep refunded the service charge. She said, "Mr. Watson, even though the bank policy is to enforce the service charge, I think your situation is unique, so I'm going to credit your account."

In that instance, my view of the bank changed from a faceless institution that knew me as an account number, to a group of reasonable, understanding people that actually cared about me. They created a happy memory for me, and a story that I wanted to tell.

What exactly did my bank do, that other customer service organizations don't? They let their first level agents make a judgment call.

When a first-level customer service agent is allowed to make a judgement call, it impacts the customer three important ways:

The customer's anxiety is immediately diffused.

When a customer calls to right what they feel is a wrong, they're already fueled with negative emotions. When the CSR isn't allowed to say "Yes," their default response is "No." And the "No" response will only increase anxiety. Giving that first person the right to say "yes" when it's warranted, can quickly diffuse the anger before it increases.

The customer sees the company differently.

When a first-level CSR is able to meet the customers need, that tells the customer that the company is focused on the customer; not themselves and their policies. And this kind of impression is what builds loyalty.

The customer's time is respected.

The only thing worse than feeling you've been treated unfairly is having to spend a lot of precious time correcting the issue. When first-level agents are empowered to make more decisions, the customer isn't forced to spend even more time at level two. Customers can feel the difference.

What was refreshing was the fact that a CSR was allowed to make a judgement call, apply naturally common sense, and delight the customer. Too often, CSR's are trained to enforce policy rather than make good decisions to create good relationships.

There's a formula for getting there, that's actually quite simple:

Hire people that you're willing to trust. Then trust them.

Posted at 08:22 AM in Contact Center, Customer Service, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

11/09/2014

The Difference between Truth and Trust in Marketing

As customers, we want the truth.

The big sign said, "Domestic Passengers are Welcome to Shop Here."

So, I went inside, selected a bottle of my favorite bourbon, and brought it to to cashier.

She told me that I couldn't buy it, because I'm a domestic passenger.

"But the sign says domestic passengers can," I said.

As if on cue, she responded, "You need to read the bottom of the sign."

She was right - way down at the bottom of the sign, in a much smaller print was the message:

"Only passengers holding international boarding passes are allowed to purchase liquor and tobacco."

Never mind that 75% of their shelf space is dedicated to the stuff that the Welcomed Domestic Shopper can't buy.

Duty Free America lured me into their store with a cleverly-deceptive sign. Technically, the sign was truthful. The asterisk that followed the BIG WELCOME MESSAGE is the author's way of saying, "What you just read isn't the entire truth; if you want to know the entire truth, then you have to find and read the footnotes.

The point is this: If your BIG MESSAGE requires footnotes to be true, then your BIG MESSAGE alone is not true. Make it true; customers deserve straight talk; we deserve plain and simple truth.

When it comes to sales and marketing, there are three types of Truth:

Plain and Simple Truth
Technically True Truth
Untruth and Lies

Customers are emotional beings, and therefore we only trust one kind of Truth, and that's Plain and Simple Truth. Technically True Truth makes us suspicious. And the third isn't type isn't worthy of discussion.

Is there any Technically True Truth embedded in your customer-facing messaging? If there is, consider replacing it wiit Plain and Simple Truth. While Plain and Simple Truth may not lure as many prospects into your pipeline, those of us that do come inside will more loyal, long-term profitable customers. As for the prospects that are turned away by the truth? They weren't going to buy from you, anyway. So why invest the resources in unqualified prospects?

What type of truth does your marketing speak?

And on which type of Truth do you want to build your reputation?

Posted at 10:46 AM in Communication, Marketing Best Practices, Reputation, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

04/22/2013

3 Key Considerations Before Using Your Brand in a 3rd-party Promotion

Third party promotions can be risky - even when your only investment is your name and your customer list. Last week, my wife and I each received a postcard from Delta Airlines. (I say the postcard came from Delta, because the Delta name and the Delta logo were the only names an logos on either side of the cards.)

The following message appeared on the back of the card:

"In celebration of our new year packages we've selected you to received 2 round trip airfares to anywhere in the contiguos United States - good for the next 12 months!

Call within 48 hours and receive a 3 day 2 night stay at major brands."

(Hey Delta, I trusted you!)

I've flown more on Delta over the past few years, and have noticed a steady improvement in the service and experience that I receive. As a result, I trust Delta more. That's why this promotion seems so out of character, and causes me to wonder if I'm starting to trust them too much.

If you partner with a third party, and especially when you loan them your brand, there are at least three important points to consider:

Know your partner.
Is it a company that shares and practices your cultural values? Is transparency one of those?
Know how your name will be used.
Understand the full message and process that will surround the use of your name. And be sure to view it with customer empathy.
Their experience will be your experience.
Understand that your customer may see the experience delivered by the third party as another experience delivered by you.

In business, your reputation is your soul. Be careful who you loan it to.

Posted at 05:00 AM in Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

03/25/2013

The Hidden Cost of Hidden Fees, and Why Companies Lose Customers

We've all been there...

A sneaky little charge shows up on our credit card statement; a charge for something we never ordered (not on purpose, anyway!), or a bogus "penalty fee."

Back in January, I purchased a 30-day pass for unlimited Internet Access from Boingo, for my 7-day stay at a hotel in France. (The 30-day pass was a better deal than seven 1-day passes.) At just $34.95, I was a happy customer...

...until I reviewed my March credit card statement There were two more charges for $34.95 from Boingo, and I didn't remember ordering the service again in February and March. Why would I? I was only in France for 7 days.

I called Boingo customer service to find out what the charges were for, and to ask for a refund. Without question, the agent quickly issued a refund. She explained to me that "Boingo automatically renews, unless you ask us to stop."

I'll bet Boingo collects a lot of revenue that way. But I'll also bet they've lost a lot of customers because of it.

At a very basic level, there are two types of revenue that a company generates from its customer base:

Revenue generated through activities that create value for the customer
Revenue generated through activities that do not create value to the customer.

In an ideal world, all revenue would be generated through the first type of activity. Companies would only charge customers when the customer receives true value. But we don't live in an ideal world.

The Hidden Cost
There are a lot of companies that make a lot of money by charging customers for activities that have no value for the customer. And when this happens, customers revolt, and customers defect. When customers defect, they need to be replaced, and replacing customers costs money in the form of advertising and promotions. While the "easy money" that a company can earn over the short term through miscellaneous fees and service charges can be very tempting, the cancerous cost of customer discontent and defection can hurt the company over the long haul.

The Point is this:

Before implementing a fee, ask the question: Is the fee for an activity that directly provides value to the customer? Be honest with the answer. If the answer is "Yes," it's likely safe to proceed. If the answer is "No," then don't do it.

Bank of America used this logic in late 2011. They announced plans to implement a $5 monthly fee to all customers with debit cards. Customers revolted, and Bank of America reversed the plan. While the relatively small monthly fee would have generated millions of additional monthly revenue for the bank, Bank of American realized, based on the customer response, they were likely to lose tens of thousands of customers, if they were to implement the $5 monthly fee. The long-term cost of losing the customers, they realized, would be greater than the short-term revenue gained from the fee.

Be a value creator, not a value detractor. You customers will likely thank you, long into the future.

Posted at 08:00 AM in Best Practices, Customer Loyalty, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

03/15/2013

How Proactive Communication and Transparency will earn Customers' Trust

Like most people, I order a lot of stuff off the Internet, and I have an automatic renewal set for a lot of them, including magazine and on-line newspaper subsriptions, software (like the software that I use to write this blog) and even energy bars.

But I don't always remember what I've set to "auto-renew," until I receive the order confirmation from the company. In other words, they "remind me" by sending me an email, notifying me that they've just charged by bank account or my credit card.

However, one company handles it differently...

I recently received a reminder from the Daytimer Company (see below). Instead of waiting until after they shipped the product and charged me for it, they're telling me before they ship, and before they charge me.

In other words, they're giving me an opportunity to change my order, or even opt out, if I choose to.

Now, I suspect that most companies don't take that approach for fear that they'll lose customers, and lose revenue. That's certainly a valid concern, but it's clearly not a customer-focused approach.

Daytimer is being more customer-focused, by being more transparent. And I respect that in a vendor. Sure, they may lose a few renewals, but I suspect they'll gain a lot more trust.

Go ahead, Daytimer - process my order and charge my credit card - I'm glad to continue doing business with a company that's up front with me.

The point is this:

If a customer will be impacted by somethign you're about to do, notify the customer. Even if you're not contractually bound to notify the customer, do it because the customer would want to know. Do it for the customers' sake - not for your own.

Because that's what customer-centricity is all about.

Posted at 08:00 AM in Communication, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

02/09/2013

Rebuilding Customer Trust: Why New Orleans will host more Superbowls

When the lights went out during this year's Superbowl, my immediate thoughts were, "New Orleans will have a hard time convincing the NFL to let it host another Superbowl."

I immediately thought of Jet Blue, and its systems failures on Valentines Day in 2007, causing thousands of flights to be cancelled, and stranding more thousands of customers. How does a company restore its reputation, after such a public catastrophe?

Entergy New Orleans did what Jet Blue did: They handled the situation in a way that will not only restore any lost trust, but potentially increase the level of confidence among their customers. They were candid, specific, and put forth a plan for resolution.

Take the Blame

Entergy New Orleans was open and honest in taking the blame. They openly said, "It's our fault." Too often, a company will offer statements that show some remorse, but don't explicitly say, "We're the ones to blame." Customers need to hear statements of ownership. That's the first step in rebuilding trust.

Identify the Root Cause

Once you've taken the blame, explain exactly what caused the problem, and be specific.

David Neeleman, founder and CEO of JetBlue identified specific factors within outdated information systems, that prevented the airline from taking steps to adjust to the storm.

Similarly, Entergy New Orleans identified a relay setting within the switching gear, as the ultimate cause of the power failure. Offering detailed, plausible explanations for what went wrong change the focus from emotional finger-pointing, toward problem-solving.

Present a Plan for Resolution

You need to give customers a concrete reason to believe that things will be better in the future; that the problem won't happen again. David Neeleman vowed to replace the outdated systems, and immediately established and communicated a new "Customer Bill of Rights."

Going public with a specific plan to prevent the issue from recurring will be the next step for Entergy New Orleans, and SMG, which manages the Superdome.

Execute on the Plan

A plan is just a plan, until it's put into action. That's when real change happens, and that when future potential problems are prevented. Once a clear plan is established, Entergy New Orleans anad SMG will need to carry out that plan, and communicate to their consitutents what's been done.

Jet Blue is a stonger company today for having endured t he Valentine's Day Massacre in 2007, because of the way they handled the situation. Entergy New Orleans will likely be stronger, more trustworthy, and supplying the power to more Superbowls, by continuing down the path of candor, causality and action.

Posted at 10:47 AM in Communication, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

08/10/2012

Marketing Morality and the Cost of Lobster in Maine

It's summer on the coast of Maine, and people are eating lobster - lots of it.

Lobster prices have hit record lows, due to a glut in the supply. But if you go into a restaurant, don't expect to pay any less than you normally would - it appears that restaurants are still charging top dollar for the highly-craved crustacean. Should their customers be upset? Should they feel cheated? Is the restaurant risking its customer-friendly reputation, by not sharing?

When there's a glut of oil in the market, gasoline prices drop at the pump, and the consumer benefits. But when there's a glut of lobster in the market, the prices are no lower at the plate than they are when the supply is "normal."

Should a restaurant lower their prices on lobster dishes, when the restaurant pays less - a lot less - for the lobster? Should customers expect to share in the savings? Does a business risk its trustworthy reputation by not sharing the savings with its customers?

When a company reduces its costs through its own innovative efforts, it's "earned" the savings, and can more easily justify keeping those savings as profits. But when the savings were not "earned" by the company, is there any "marketing obligation" to pass those savings on to the customer?

Posted at 07:20 AM in Marketing Best Practices, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

08/08/2012

How Trust in the Customer Leads to Growth in Business

In the August 2012 Issue of CRM Magazine, "The Guiding Assumption" by Lior Arussy describes how many (too many, in fact) business create policies to prevent customers from ripping them off, or "abusing the system." Building business operations in response to those few bad apples can be a bad idea, because it unjustly punishes the masses, and over time, will limit the growth of business.

By my own experience as a customer, I've realized that the converse of this - extending the benefit of the doubt to all customers, despite the behavior of a few bad apples - can be a pretty powerful catalyst in growing a business.

When I moved to Maine 23 years ago, I began shopping at LL Bean regularly. I was very comfortable buying anything from them, because I knew they'd let me
return anything I bought, for any reason, at any time . You can say I have trusted them because they have trusted me. While a small percentage of
customers surely abused the policy, the vast majority did not. And LL Bean profited greatly, by extended trust to all.

The deepest, longest lasting and most mutually successful relationships - both business and personal - are built upon Trust. Openly exhibit trust in your customers. They'll more likely respond in kind.

Don't let that one bad apple determine how you run your business.

Posted at 12:58 PM in Best Practices, Customer Loyalty, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

05/30/2012

How to gain the trust of your customers

Hey Sheraton, why is the $4 price on your water bottles printed so small?

Does that give you an easy way to make a few bucks off the unsuspecting guest? That’s not what you intended? Well, that’s how it felt to me, your customer…

I stay in hotels often enough to know that in-room refreshments, like the ones in those well-stocked mini-bars are not free. People expect to be charged for stuff like that. It’s made obvious by those placards that are placed right inside the door. They’re made visible so that the guest can’t miss them.

But your water bottles are a different story…

The price appears intentionally hidden through a creative combination of extra-small characters, and use of background colors. That price was barely visible.

I’m OK with the fact that you charge $4.00 for a bottle of water. You have a right to charge whatever you want, just as I have the right to not buy it, if I think it’s too expensive.

But I’m not OK with your presumed attempt to hide the high price through your creatively deceptive label design. If you’re going to charge me 4 bucks for a bottle of water, make that as clear as the word “Thirsty.” (Hint: If you're looking for the price, think "under water.")

A business grows a loyal customer base by delivering value, and building trust. Trust and dis-trust are generated in infinite ways. Even through the design of a water bottle tag.

Weigh all decisions, large and small, from the customers’ point of view. How will it impact your perceived trust-worthiness?

Posted at 08:01 AM in Reputation, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

03/24/2012

The Right Way to Raise Prices, without Alienating your Customers

I've been a frequent reader of the New York Times on-line eddition for as long as I've been a frequent user of the Internet. And I still am, even though it's no longer free. But for those laggards among us - people like me who don't want to ante up, but know they eventually will - the Times is taking a smart and considerate approach.

When the Times began the transition to paid access to online content, they imposed a limit of 20 free articles per month, per "subscriber." Earlier this week, the Times entered another phase of the transition - they reduced the number of "free articles" from 20 per month to 10 per month. The fact that they've added this phase reveals how they're sincere about making it easy on the customer, by smoothing the transition, to help customers to adapt to the new subscription fee.

Over the past several years, we've seen a lot of companies in a lot of industries alienate a lot of customers by charnging for some things that were once free. Airline baggage fees, Netflix doubling its fees in last July, Bank of America's proposed $5 debit card fee,and others have been publicly demonized for suddently announcing fees in a way that infuriated customers.

But new fees don't have to alienate customers - sometimes, it's all in the delivery.

As a frequent reader of the New York Times on-line, I was initially frustrated and disappointed when I learned that they would soon charge customers for continued unlimited access to their on-line edition.

Frustrated, and mostly disappointed, but definitely not angry. Here's why:

The Times explained in simple, logical terms why they made the decision to charge (a logical, believable economic reason). And they gave notice early and often (several months in advance, and every time I logged on.)

When their new on-line fees began (or, the number of "free" views became limited), it wasn't a surprise, and the reason was clear. I wasn't happy with the situation, but I accepted it.

If you do have to begin charging your customers for something that they didn't pay for in the past, take a tip from the Times:

Explain in simple, human terms why you have to make the change.
Be honest and be sincere. Don't say it through a stuffed-shirt executive, but say it through a casually-dressed, mid-level employee; an every-day person to whom your customers will relate.

Offer a Transition Period.
And don't shock your customers by imposing the entire fee suddenly like an ice-cold bath tub, but give them a way to transition gradually, to minimize the pain.

Give them early notice in straight, honest language, and transition gradually, so when it does happen, it's old news.

Posted at 10:23 PM in Customer Loyalty, Retail Customer Experience, Trust & Transparency | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Through the Eyes of the Customer

Business Insights through Common Customer Experiences.

Search

Categories