Read more on Cloud Computing
Given the efforts marketing departments make to collect customer data, one would think they'd see an incoming query as a gift. But too many corporations don't see it that way, including the financial services firms my research firm recently surveyed in our First Quarter 2005 report.
Increasingly, prospective and existing customers are interacting with corporations electronically, both for research and purchasing purposes. Those that ignore online inquiries are alienating consumers--especially young "affluents," the 24- to 33-year-olds earning $75,000 or above who are the heaviest Internet users (and most likely to be asking the questions). In fact, our research indicates that 70 percent of consumers go to a competitor's site if they don't receive a timely response to an online inquiry. And losing those customers is a faux pas few companies can afford.
Our research indicates that users expect both a timely and helpful response from online sites. Timely, according to users, is within a day--and that window is decreasing.
Unfortunately, most customers dealing with financial services firms are likely to be disappointed. In fact, only one in three have any chance of receiving a helpful and timely response. And within the securities industries and credit card companies, the chances are even lower.
So what happens to the people who don't get an answer within a day? Some get a response the next day, but a third receive messages that deemed unhelpful, often involving canned text and stock answers directing users to the Web site. An amazing one out of five customers never receives a reply.
The rest get replies that dribble in over the next three to four days, and they often ignore them, having since moved on. The issue of responsiveness transcends industries. In discussions with major corporations, I am often told they receive far too many e-mails per day to send replies to each inquirer. My response is to ask them whether online customers are as important as the ones that walk into a business branch or call on the telephone. Would it be acceptable to say, "Look, we get so many calls per day that we sometimes let them go to voicemail, answer what we can and delete the rest"?
Not surprisingly, these companies respond to e-mails quickly, often in less than four hours, and sometimes within the hour. For example, Amazon.com leads the way for responsiveness in retail, Dell in computer products, E-Loan in financial services and Orbitz in the travel industry. Through their Web-focused approach--which treats e-mail communications as part of the business process, integrating fully with back-end systems--these companies have begun to take significant business away from traditional players that haven't seen the light.
The good news is that in response to competitive pressures, some mainstream companies have re-engineered their own business processes to increase online responsiveness. That's important because e-mail responsiveness is a key litmus test for companies to determine whether they are structured to attract and service online consumers.
Think of a corporation's Web site as the front door for its most demographically desirable customers. If companies don't respond to the knocking on the door, they're effectively giving away that portion of their online business. And since more than 10 percent of all purchases in the U.S. are either researched or consummated on the Web, they had better open the door.
Biography
Terry Golesworthy is president of
8 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
It does seem to be getting slowly better as we vote with our fingers....
In point of fact it takes two or three rounds of messages that start off telling the firm their CRM software is brain dead before you get a real person in the loop. By then you are annoyed and less likely to do business with the firm again.
Firms like Yahoo and Dell may think they are saving money by using automatic response software, but they are losing customers in the bargain.
ONLINE CUSTOMER DISSERVICE
I can't tell you how many times I have tried (online) to ask a simple question of a company I do business with, wanted to do business with, or needed help from, only to have that inquiry drop into a black hole. In my own experience, response rates are far worse than 4 responses out of 5 inquiries. It's more like 1 out of 5 or 1 out of 10. It's abysmal.
Earlier this week, I was working on a technical problem for a fellow employee at work (I work in tech support). The tool the user was trying to run crashed at startup with an odd error message. I had tried to find the cause of the error message on their web site, but couldn't. So I submitted an online inquiry (which, by the way, was what they said they preferred customers do). That was Monday. It's Thursday and they still haven't answered.
The other thing that really ticks me off about online customer support is when the company's response to your online inquiry comes, but isn't helpful at all. Many times when I actually DO get a response, that response is along the lines of "You'll need to call us at xxx-xxx-xxxx to fix this problem." In the case of a bank, a mutual fund, or some other financial institution, I can understand why some transactions aren't appropriate to complete by email. But if I'm already logged into your web site, if I am asking a simple question or making a minor request, there is no reason I should have to call the company. I think many organizations think it's easier to shove you into the phone queue rather than take an extra step to try to help you.
For example, in January I purchased an MP3 player from Buy.com and decided to buy a 2-year replacement warranty on it in case it died on me. I ended up having to order the warranty separately from the device. It seemed to fall into a black hole in Buy.com's system. When I emailed with a warranty question using their customer service form, I got a response a couple of days later, saying that I'd have to call them to sort the problem out. That was ridiculous to me. I'd provided both order numbers (the one for the MP3 player and the one for the warranty). I'd provided contact information and other proof that I was who I said I was (including the fact that I had to login to the same account in order to send the message). In my opinion, there is absolutely NO REASON their employees couldn't have handled that simple transaction for me. They could just as easily have picked up the phone and called the warranty department on my behalf, resolving the problem. But they didn't. They told me I had to do it. I haven't yet. It's the principle of the thing.
As another example, I had some dental work done last April that was recommended by two dentists in two independent practices. Confident that it must indeed be necessary, I had the work done and submitted to my insurance company. Months later, they declined to pay for it, leaving me stuck with a $1,900 bill. I went to their web site, providing all the relevant contact information, only to have them tell me they couldn't find any record of me being a customer and that I'd have to call them to sort this out. I find it hard to believe that given my social security number, name, address, and phone number that they couldn't find my record in their system. Instead of calling them, I complained to our HR people, telling them that I really don't like their customer service personnel. Interestingly, they pre-approved me for exactly the same work this year, on two teeth that were in less-bad shape than the two they denied my claim for last year. So not only is their customer service lousy, their coverage is inconsistent. For those of you who care, this experience was with MetLife Dental.
Aside from the fact that I personally dislike using the phone, there is a reason I prefer online communication for customer service when my issues are not urgent. What I often find to be the case is that I call a place and eventually reach a human. I explain who I am and what I need to that human. Often, they have to hand me off to someone else. I have to explain myself again. Sometimes even a third time. This level of redundancy is time-consuming and frustrating. In an online inquiry, I can explain the situation clearly and concisely, then ask whatever question I need to ask. That one explanation can be forwarded around the destination organization to whomever needs to see it, without a detail being lost and without my having to repeat the same story until I'm blue in the face.
With Internet access being so widespread today, you'd think companies would be leveraging online customer service more and better than they do... and the smart ones will be.
I provided the same service for a ski resort in Arizona. Timely responses to email inquiries that provided detailed answers based on a per situation basis.
In the end, the management of the credit union valued the service I provided, while the ski resort viewed the service as unnecessary. Every time I take the time to send an inquiry to a company I do business with, I expect a level of service equivalent to what I would provide a customer of my own business. IMMEDIATE!
If I do not receive the proper respect, I search for alternatives for that product/service.
Consumers determine which businesses survive and thrive in this economy. Make your voice heard with choice.
When they have a technical problem, you will get 3 auto respsonses, then deal with a series of folks sho don't seem to actually read the message, or intentionally miss the point.
Most insulting and offensive is the assumption that everything is always fine on their end and the customer is simply too stupid to read a (useless) help page. (Yes, their system is USUALLY just fine, but when it isn't, burrowing through "customer-sevice" types to someone who knows anything is simply impossible.)
I truly regret having pre-registered my domains so far in advance.
Thing is, they USED to be pretty good, IMHO.
It is amazing that companies that promote their service products, products designed to provide service in turn for their customer's customers are... what? Too busy to Reply? Don't have CSRs that know what to do or say? Aren't automated enough to deal with the process? How can that be?
They offer service, but don't provide it. Do I have that right?
When I was in the Mail Order and Direct Marketing business, my rule of thumb was that if we processed the order and shipped it as agreed; anticipated and dealt with normal transaction- based questions at the time of sale, we would solve over 90% of our "service" related problems before they occurred. The ten percent that inevitiably arose from cirumstances were to be dealt with in one call, or a callback the same day, as agreed. There were few unresolved problems at the end of the day, even based on shipping thousands of orders each and every day, seven days.
Today, automated voice systems that match keywords verbally to answers are getting better every day, Social Security Administration and others a case in point. Recruiters use "intelligent" scanning to search for keywords and phrases through thousands of resumes posted electronically for job openings. AI can be a significant part of the CS system dealing with email, in fact better, because keyword technology is so adaptable to email Customer Service problems.
What an opportunity for a CS software company!
Oh, and no matter what system is used, the customer has to have the option AT ANY TIME to say "Enough! I want to talk to a real person", whether the initial communication was by email ("click to talk" is now available), telephone, snail mail, IM, or whatever.
Great CS is doable, and the companies that don't provide it will lose to the companies that do.
- Bill Jr.