That normally wouldn't rate as revelation, but keep in mind the PC landscape looked very different back then. Before Dell made his mark, the mail-order computer business was populated by all sorts of scalawags. All you needed was a splashy magazine advertisement with a 1-800 phone number, and you were off to the races.
Unfortunately, truth in advertising was a custom more honored in the breach than in the observance. As mail-order purchasing caught on with more people, the buying public discovered an unpleasant truth: Customer service was a veritable crapshoot. While geeks could fend for themselves if their systems wigged out, laymen were often out of luck.
By the early 1990s, the fly-by-night operators had been crushed in an inevitable shakeout that saw Dell vault to the top of the mail-order PC business. Other companies had lower prices, but Dell was simply more dependable. People learned to trust the brand, and that paid off in the coin of customer loyalty. Dell successfully parlayed that "put the customer first" strategy over the course of the next decade and ultimately become the world's No. 1 PC maker.
Considering its customer-friendly track record, Dell's recent decision to shut down its Customer Care message boards is getting pilloried as an act of monumental stupidity, if not monumental arrogance. The company says the closure is necessary because authorized Dell representatives--and not customers--need to handle the oh-so-complicated issues that were being handled on the message board.
Am I missing something here?
First, that cock-and-bull explanation is something I'd expect to hear out of the mouth of White House spokesman Scott McClellan. The folks at Dell are too smart to believe that sort of pabulum.
Isn't the very purpose of a message board supposed to be the free exchange of information? Technical boards are a great place to get fast answers--especially when a company staffer's not immediately available. Dell chose to shut down the forum rather than engage with its customers. I suppose you can shrug it off as an isolated example of bad judgment.
The closure got extra attention because it occurred around the same time that Jeff Jarvis published his much-cited Dell Hell commentary about Dell's lousy tech support. The fact that it was Jarvis, a high-profile journalist-turned-blogger, doing the kvetching doubtlessly drew more attention to the issue than if it had been Joe Schmo.
Viewed against the backdrop of intermittent complaints about Dell service, the decision sends the wrong signal.
Talking about how the Internet is altering the relationship between companies and their customers, Jarvis and others have correctly seized upon the idea of the ongoing conversation that should be taking place. (The best reference point is the Cluetrain Manifesto).
Sometimes, companies get a clue, and sometimes, they remain clueless. We're still quite early into this Internet/blog revolution, and it's not yet clear how it will all end up. Still, it's safe to predict that any institution (including a news organization) that ignores the conversation does so at its own peril.
Biography
Charles Cooper is CNET News.com's executive editor of commentary.
85 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
So are you willing to defend the traitor?
a "liberal" bit of politicking. If he'd made an offhand reference to
(former Clinton press secretary) Mike McCurry, I doubt you'd be
complaining about C|net's supposed conservative bias.
Calling an offhand joke "liberal" is no less political. You're
editorializing in your complaint.
Yes, that's sarcasm, but it gets the point across.
Indeed, check your politics at the door, Cooper.
Perhaps the first step to improving customer service is to profesionalise it - move from the message board to a proper tech. support service. There are plenty of other boards out there.
This could be completely wrong of course, but it serves as an example of the many angles not considered.
It's not intended to be some sort of
journalistic survey of an issue -- it's intended
to convey and (presumably) support a singular
point of view. Cooper typically writes op-ed
pieces, he's not big into journalism.
That said, journalists very frequently juxtapose
fringe stances on issues with accepted stances
in a fashion that conveys an artificial equality
in their validity. Global warming pieces are a
good example. Some 250 peer-reviewed articles
cover the topic, all of them concluding it
exists, is measurable, and is having a tangible
and observable impact even today. Yet popular
press articles, until recently, have presented
two conflicting points of view: there is global
warming and there isn't. Making it appear to the
casual observer as if there's no conclusive
evidence and thus doubt or confusion as to
whether it exists or if it's a problem.
It happens with all sorts of journalistic
coverage of topics: science, bioethics, software
development, etc.
Cooper might be evangelizing, and he might be
wrong, but at least he's being true to the
format and taking a singular point-of-view and
running with it.
Election.
Cooper's just speaking to his perceived audience of snobby
"enlightened" intellectuals (who OF COURSE must be democrats.
Talk about arrogance and stupidity. Pot. Kettle. Black.
wouldn't be working for C|Net) and I can imagine the last thing he'd
have sitting on his desk would be a Dell. Not everyone is sold on
the "Dude, you're getting a Dell" nonsense!
I think the majority of people who are complaining forget that the article they just read is simply a voicing of his opinion; a casual conversation with the reader.
Good for Cooper to be a liberal, good he writes for some other websites, just leave the political ranting for those websites, please.
BTW. Thanks to Hieronymous Bosch for the plagiarism report.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://blogs.siliconvalley.com/gmsv/2005/07/cluetrain_dont_.html" target="_newWindow">http://blogs.siliconvalley.com/gmsv/2005/07/cluetrain_dont_.html</a>
Cooper, the next time either,
a) At least change the headline
b) Give some credit to the blogger you took the idea from
the story belongs to a pack of pathalogical liars who are part of
MoveOn and Michael Moore's crowd. Bad news is that Cnet gives
a voice to anyone from the fringe. People have the right to their
own opinions, not their own facts.
the We'reNotAfraid.com website that protests the London
bombings.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/2061-10786_3-5785426.html?tag=tb" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/2061-10786_3-5785426.html?tag=tb</a>
The problem Guevin sees is that the user-contributed photos
are too materialistic. Unbelievable. cnet seems to be
encouraging irrelevant, liberal posturing. If, as another poster
suggested, Cooper has positions at MoveOn.org or
MichaelMoore.com, then that pretty much explains everything.
cnet readers may themselves want to "move on" to a different
tech news source.
> tech news source.
You're free to leave. Go get your "news" over at Fox.
BTW, in case you haven't noticed, someone in the Bush Admin is a traitor. Doesn't that bother you?
actions (comparing them unfavorably to McClellan's behavior).
Opinion is the coin of the realm in an op-ed. You can moan about
liberal bias all you like, but it changes nothing. Cooper is writing
his opinion, not covering a story as a journalist.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://blogs.siliconvalley.com/gmsv/2005/07/cluetrain_dont_.html" target="_newWindow">http://blogs.siliconvalley.com/gmsv/2005/07/cluetrain_dont_.html</a>
"talking about your political vews?" I've yet to meet a conservative
with any real sense of global vision, but you have to be this short-
sighted? Fox News, your home away from home, lead their news
updates yesterday with stories about McClellan's not being able to
comment. It's a fact. He couldn't comment. It's not an
interpretation or a Vote For Clinton sign. It's a joke. Get it? Using
timely events we are all familiar with to communicate with each
other on-line? Creating community...?
The issue with a technical support message board hosted on Dell I think is with liability. If someone get's bad advice, like (remove the memory dimm while the computer is on) from a user on the Dell message board, and fries their computer, who's responsible? Is it covered under warranty? Why isn't Dell monitoring the board (Is that even possible given the nature of a public forum with customer base as large as Dells)?
I agree with Chris that yes, customers should be able to help on another, but I'm sure this decision has stemmed from legal concerns as well as the fact that most message boards are not part of the normal operational workflow. They are not able to track response times (I think) and figure out customer satisfaction. Not to mention that they will most likely not be able to enter in TS information into their database for future support queries.
These need to be taken into consideration. Hope that provides some insight into issues I have had to deal with as well working for a PC business.
Wow, look everyone, an opinion. Careful now, they sense fear and will begin to offend you if you don't understand them.
Folks, I think we need to sit down, have a Coke and catch a breath. As I responded to one e-mail today, I've been fond of political humor ever since I came of age in the Johnson Administration. If you never saw Lenny Bruce or Mort Sahl do their shtick, you really missed something. Every administration since -- all the way down to Bush the Second -- has at one time or another been deserving of a little ribbing. If we can't laugh at ourselves, then maybe this country is really as screwed up as its critics think. I don't agree but that's beside the point. Fact is, my column -- and yes, it's a COLUMN -- concentrated on Dell and how it responds to customers in the age of the Internet. Folks who are obsessing about one line out of a 650 word essay are really missing the point.
Why not not say "typical politician spokesperson"? that would cover NY Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton -- both of whom are demagogues beyond belief.
It's YOU who are now "off the clue train." There was no 'political humor' in your slap to the face; no "ribbing;" no context at all. Just a tongue in cheek, holier-than-thou assumption that YOUR political assessment of the Bush administration (and by implication, Dell) is infallible.
It's YOU who just "doesn't get it." When calling someone else clueless, it's usually wise to ensure that you don't inadvertently let your inherent prejudices allow you to come off as even MORE clueless than your target - it impinges your credibility with the very audience you seek to inform and/or persuade.
I think the real answer is that Mr. Dell has hired professional management, who like many other big company managements, want, no need, control of all of the processes that affect a company's operations, and by extension, reputation and credibility.
That mistaken assumption, that Dell's internal personnel were so much better than the Board's contributors, is demonstrably in error.
And, even if it were not in error, Rollins misses the point of the value of the interaction with Dell customers, the marketing intelligence they provide through monitoring the Boards, and other contributions.
No, I think Rollins created a bad situation by his decision, or Rollins implemented the decision based on the bad advice of corporate apparachicks.
It may be understandable to the uninformed, or justifiable to the ignorant, but wholly out of place in the heirarchy of valuing customer relationships.
Mr. Dell can certainly appreciate that one of the reason's for his success, as outlined by Charles Cooper of CNet, is that he cared about being the best for his customers; best products, best service, best value.
Mr. Dell needs to rededicate Dells' management and staff to the overiding principle of success in today's rapid-paced communications world of blogs, podcasting and Internet searches; "the Customer is king, long live the king."
If Dell built his success on "value" does it make any sense to throw it away for the sake of corporate expediency?
"Michael, oh Michael; we're lost without ye."