Thanks to all of you who participated in this year’s survey! The unique perspectives shared in the survey feedback and analysis produced some interesting results. My hope is that the information can be used to improve the product and service quality for those who choose to read it, share it, discuss it, and act upon it.
All the best,
Steve

Abstract

In a recent survey, industry professionals identified the top three contributors to the industry-wide decline in customer service. Each of these causes is presented along with suggestions intended to mitigate them and support employee and customer satisfaction. Additionally, examples from The Ritz-Carlton, Nordstrom, and Starbucks are provided as illustrations of what each company does, in part, to consistently excel in employee and customer satisfaction. Finally, interpretations of the data are offered with an eye toward providing cost-effective training and a follow-up structure that improves employee commitment to continuous improvement.

For more complete results and analysis, click here.

Starbucks card winners:

Jeff B., Phoenix, AZ
Mark C., Frankfurt, Germany
Lisa G., New York, NY
Ron H., Fullerton, CA
David M., Easton, CT
Robert M., Englewood, CO
Kent P., Lincoln, NE
Marianne S., Washington, DC
Jane U., Dallas, TX
Joe V., Indianapolis, IN

My wife had ordered a set of Batman and Robin walkie-talkies on-line from the website of a national toy retailer. After they arrived and my boys had a chance to try them out, we learned that the reception was poor if the handsets were more than one or two rooms apart.

The retailer has a store in my area, so I stopped by to return them. I explained the reason for the return to the customer service rep and provided the receipt from the on-line purchase. She called for her manager. Her manager arrived and, after assessing the situation, told me that no refund or in-store credit could be offered because I didn’t have a “bar code receipt that would have accompanied the product.”

I responded that I was not aware of another receipt and that the receipt I had was, to the best of my knowledge, the only one issued from the on-line transaction. The manager said, “I know, I know. But we were bought by new owners about a year and a half ago and they’re sticklers for the new policy.” I asked him what the new policy was and he said, “That all product returns are accompanied by a bar code receipt.” He then poured salt in the wound by saying, “Before the new policy went into effect I would have at least been able to give you in-store credit, but now I’m afraid there’s nothing I can do for you.”

I asked him what he thought Nordstrom would do under the same circumstances. He said, “Yeah, I know.” I then said, “Listen, I know it’s not your fault. You are not responsible for the new policy. But I’ll tell you, my son’s birthday is coming up and if I had received in-store credit, I’d be shopping here today. But, since I didn’t, I’ll be shopping elsewhere.”

And it’s true. I left the store disappointed, with merchandise that didn’t work properly, and with a better understanding of this retailer’s restrictive return policy. But I still needed to shop for my son’s birthday present. Then it occurred to me that, at the mall across the street, on the third floor in the children’s department, Nordstrom sold toys!

Have you recently encountered a customer-unfriendly return policy that prompted you to exercise your consumer right to vote with your feet and shop across the street?

I’d like to contrast my last post, When people compete, products get better, with an illustration of abundance mentality and consumer choice.

My father-in-law is a restaurateur here in Denver. Several years ago, he took out a full-page ad in the local newspaper that read, “Take this ad to your favorite restaurant and receive $10 off dinner for two.” The ad did not specify the name of a restaurant or any contact information.

Diners then began to show up at restaurants located throughout the Denver area with the coupon and puzzled restaurateurs contacted the paper to see who took out the ad. As the word spread between restaurateurs that my father-in-law was responsible for the ad, they began to call him at his restaurant.

The conversations went something like this: “Hey Ed, there are some customers here at my restaurant who are trying to use your coupon!” to which my father-in-law responded, “It’s not my coupon. It’s everyone’s coupon. But if you don’t wish to be their favorite restaurant, then send them to me. I would be honored to be considered their favorite restaurant!”

To me, that illustrates an abundance mentality versus a scarcity mentality. While a person with a scarcity mentality sees the world as a finite pie—and feels threatened by forces that may reduce the size of his or her slice—a person with an abundance mentality sees the pie getting larger and larger with more opportunities for everyone to increase the size of his or her slice!

There’s a bagel restaurant in my neighborhood that posts a sign on its front door that reads, “No outside food or drink!” Apparently, the owner feels threatened by the Starbucks kiosk located inside the Albertson’s supermarket next door.

The owner must think that by posting this sign he will deter the competition from cutting into his sales of high-margin lattes and espresso drinks. What he doesn’t realize is that people do not want to be forced to drink a mediocre substitute for their favorite coffee beverage.

The last time I bought a bagel in his shop was four years ago. At that time his sign was more specific and said something like, “No Starbucks beverages allowed on the premises!” It was such a turn-off to me.

I understand the owner’s underlying intent: to limit the erosion of his own beverage sales by keeping the competition’s beverages out of his sit-down bagel restaurant.

Ironically, the message had a different effect on me. That is, I’d rather enjoy a good cup of coffee than eat one of his bagels. In fact, I presently drive to another bagel restaurant that is four miles further from my home. It also sells coffee and has a Starbucks retail store next door. The difference is that it does not censor the competition’s coffee.

I wonder what would happen if the bagel restaurant owner would remove the sign and accept (or at least tolerate) customers who entered the restaurant, Starbucks in hand, and ordered one of his bagels for dine-in?

On the one hand, bagel sales from people like me who resent the sign would increase. On the other, perhaps beverage sales would decrease due to granting customers the option of whose coffee to drink while enjoying their bagel.

What might the owner do differently in order to address a situation where customers are consuming more beverages from Starbucks than from his own restaurant?

What if he invested in the quality of his coffee beverages to rival top brands such as Starbucks and Dunkin’ Donuts—who are renowned for their coffee? Perhaps he could then offer a complimentary 12 oz. refill to (in addition to customers who purchase his coffee) customers who come in with a coffee beverage from the competition.

Imagine the effect this could have. Customers who have never tried his coffee may, after sampling it, agree that it’s as good as or perhaps better than the coffee they ordinarily drink. Customers will appreciate the value they’re given by enjoying another 12 oz. of coffee. If the customers choose to remain at the restaurant rather than taking their refill to go, maybe they will order a second bagel or a muffin to enjoy as they linger?

Instead of putting up barriers to the competition and limiting customers’ freedom of choice, why not relax the barriers and let customers decide? Customers will naturally choose what satisfies them the most. The responsibility of the business, then, is to provide that product or service – not to deny customers their freedom of choice.

I recently heard a story about a Paradise Bakery & Café general manager who earned the nickname “Cowbell Sandy” from her adoring staff.

It seems that a couple of years ago she started an incentive program to increase add-on sales of bottled water, cookies, and other high margin items. She worked with vendors to sponsor the prizes, ranging from iTunes gift cards to iPods.

Employees were so enthusiastic about the incentive program that they were constantly asking Sandy to see the printout to determine how they were performing compared to their co-workers. The report was the only way that employees could see who on the team was generating the add-on sales.

That gave Sandy another idea. Instead of tracking the incentive program electronically and then letting people know how they were doing only when the report was printed, she decided to clank a stainless steel container with a metal spoon and hoot and holler just a bit to acknowledge—in the moment—when one of her team members had added sales.

In doing so, Sandy included an element of spontaneous recognition to the incentive program. This not only created additional enthusiasm among the team, it also created a stir with customers in the mall’s food court. All of sudden, customers were coming by to see what all the clanking and laughter was about. This increased store traffic in a competitive environment with plenty of other dining options to choose from.

A couple of weeks into the promotion, the staff got together and bought a cowbell for Sandy to use in place of her makeshift noisemaker. From there, the nickname “Cowbell Sandy” was inevitable.

The program was a huge success! Top producers were adding an average of $11.50 an hour in add-on sales. Team members were receiving constant recognition from an inspiring manager in a high-energy environment filled with enthusiasm—and customers!

How about you? Do you know a “Cowbell Sandy”? Or, maybe you are a “Cowbell Sandy”? If so, feel free to chime in…

Ever noticed the greeting you receive more often than not by the person bagging your groceries at your local supermarket? If your local supermarket is like mine, it probably sounds something like this: “Paper or plastic?”

All too often, appropriate greetings have left the repertoire of most customer-facing employees in the service industry. Appropriate greetings seem to have transformed from gracious messages to welcome customers to robotic questions designed to increase throughput…

Here are some other “greetings” I hear a lot:

“Two for dinner?”

“Checking in?”

“For here or to go?”

As customers, it’s just as easy to lower our expectations of service providers and simply comply with these robotic questions in the same manner. But there’s no magic there. Nothing is happening to engage the customer, to make it memorable, or to build loyalty.

That may be why it’s so refreshing to experience service providers who are less robotic and more unique. These employees get your attention and make an impression by demonstrating authentic enthusiasm for their customers in ways that transform typical bland, ordinary transactions into memorable and unique experiences.

Your thoughts?

I used to work with a gal in New York who was fond of saying, “Love ya, mean it” - all in the same unenthusiastic breath. While her irreverence endeared her to all, it demonstrated to me that words alone, apart from an authentic delivery, can be pretty useless in conveying a message.

To that point, we’ve all experienced greeters at retail stores such as Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Blockbuster, and others. Their role is to make shoppers feel welcome by greeting them and perhaps offering a bit of assistance as they enter the store.

At one time, there may have been a spark of enthusiasm - perhaps because it was new and unexpected - for the greeter role. Today, from my perspective anyway, it appears as though the novelty has worn off. Ironically, the greeter’s podium at one large retailer faces into the store so that the rep greeting shoppers has his or her back to them. This results, many times, in a half-hearted glance and greeting over the right shoulder. It appears to be more of a security post than a greeter’s station.

At another retailer, the greeting is so long and scripted that all of the warmth and authenticity that should accompany a sincere greeting has been squeezed out in order to reinforce the store’s marketing message.

So what’s your read on store greeters? Are they unnecessary roles or is the problem in the execution?

“I appreciate your comments, mean it.” : )

As a trainer or presenter, you are likely accustomed to receiving feedback from your audiences. There are always a couple of pieces of conflicting feedback I can count on: temperature of room (too hot for some, too cold for others); and length of session (too long for some, too short for others).

Other times, there are constructive pieces of feedback that make a lot of sense (e.g., “the discussion following the simulation seemed to drag,” or “I couldn’t see the screen clearly from where I was seated”). The idea is to use this constructive feedback to improve. For instance, during my next presentation I’ll make sure to watch the time and group’s body language during the discussion following the simulation. I’ll also be more attuned to the room set-up to ensure that everyone can clearly see the screen.

So far, so good but have you ever received - from multiple sources - feedback that truly left you perplexed? I recently received feedback from a training session that “more examples” would have been helpful. While I agree that examples are vital to assist participants in transferring theory to application, I was surprised to receive the feedback because (by my count) I had included 62 separate examples over the course of a two hour presentation - that’s an example every two minutes!

I later met with the group contact and shared my confusion with this particular piece of feedback. He reassured me by saying that it only represented the views of a couple attendees out of an auditorium full of people. Still, it’s important to recognize the legitimacy of every single perspective in the room.

That got me thinking about individual and unique learning styles. They’re referred to differently depending on the source you’re citing but generally they distinguish between a learner’s preference for theory or practice, fast or slow, people or things, etc. We all have our own set of highly-evolved, nuanced preferences and tend to operate out of these preferences by default - especially when stressed (as in speaking before a large group…).

My take away: This was a great reminder to me that, while I had prepared 62 examples in advance, every participant would filter these examples differently based on his or her own unique background and set of preferences (e.g., job role, learning style preference, etc.).

Many of the examples were contained in the PowerPoint presentation or workbook. Perhaps I could share more of them orally in the future? Most of the examples were prepared in advance. Maybe I could be more spontaneous next time? The great majority of examples were my own. It might be more effective to solicit the majority of examples from the group during my next presentation.

How about you? Do you have any examples (no pun intended) of perplexing feedback from your own presentations?

Have you ever heard the phrase, “If you love what you do, you’ll never have to work a day in your life!”?

Do you agree with it?

For some jobs, this makes perfect sense. Think: ski instructor, professional golfer, food critic…you get the idea. But what about other jobs?

What if, say, you worked as a bank teller and were on your feet all day processing financial transactions? Or what if you were a server at a restaurant dealing with the dynamics of a busy kitchen and demanding customers? What if your job was to make sure that, among other things, there were no shopping carts scattered about the parking lot?

Is it realistic for these jobs to be viewed in the same way?