This post is the ninth in a series that will identify 10 different obstacles that have emerged from my analysis of customer satisfaction data. Maybe you will have encountered one or more of these obstacles in your own business? The ninth obstacle is deception.

Deception encompasses everything from the fine print used to mask hidden fees and other undesirable terms and conditions, to bait-and-switch marketing tactics that entice consumers with an attractive offer before substituting a costlier product or service.

Just last night, I stopped by my local King Soopers supermarket to pick up some essentials. Over the store intercom, I heard a woman’s voice:

“Attention shoppers: We will be giving away free merchandise at the red and black counter near Customer Service at the front of the store. This is the last announcement you will here. If you want free merchandise, please go right now to the red and black counter near Customer Service at the front of the store!”

Free merchandise? It sounded too good to be true. I’d been shopping at this particular King Soopers for more than 10 years and, with the exception of an occasional in-store taste sampling, had never heard of a promotion like this before. Intrigued, I made my way to the front of the store.

By the time I arrived, a small crowd had gathered in front of the red and black counter to receive free merchandise as instructed by the announcement.

Just then, a woman emerged from behind the counter and asked the crowd to squeeze in close so more people could fit around her booth. The woman was very animated. She held up an apple, asking the crowd to shout “Apple!” as she positioned the fruit to be sliced, diced, and pureed with her amazing food processor—for only $29.95!

A minute into her spiel it was evident that, in order to receive a free set of steak knives, you had to subject yourself to a protracted product demonstration replete with awkward humor and contrived attempts to involve the audience.

About this time, customers began to reconsider the sensational offer and resumed their shopping. I didn’t take a poll but I bet many of those customers felt duped by the original intercom announcement promising free merchandise.

In King Soopers’ defense, although it sells groceries, it is largely a marketing company that competes for the attention (and spending) of consumers in a noisy and competitive marketplace. Sometimes, it may seem necessary to make an outrageous claim simply to command the fleeting attention of prospective customers. And if some consumers feel duped, well, that’s just business…

But then there are companies like L.L.Bean. Although L.L.Bean is a retail company specializing in clothing and outdoor recreation equipment, it too is largely a marketing company with a significant mail-order, online, and retail presence around the world.

For those who are unfamiliar with L.L.Bean, it ranks among the top retailers in the world in customer satisfaction. And it’s the type of company that one would never associate with deceptive marketing practices. Instead, L.L.Bean relies on the honesty of its people and the integrity of its products.

If a representative says a product will arrive within two days, then you can take that delivery date to the bank. If the catalogue claims that all products are guaranteed to give 100% satisfaction in every way, you can count on it. There’s no need to look for a disclaimer or fine print that shields L.L.Bean from responsibility.

Unless you’re a magician, deception is bad for business. Commit to honesty, openness, and candor in all your customer dealings.

Gimmicks are fine—just not at the expense of customers’ trust. Besides, your customers probably have all the steak knives they really need.

I welcome all questions, comments, bouquets and brickbats.

In his book, Customer Centricity: What It Is, What It Isn’t, and Why It Matters, Peter Fader, Professor of Marketing at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, defines customer centricity as “a strategy to fundamentally align a company’s products and services with the wants and needs of its most valuable customers.”

While reading the book, I was reminded of the Aristotle quote: “There is nothing so unequal as the equal treatment of unequals.”

This is a slippery slope in customer service because, when taken to extremes, it appears to be prejudicial service, where one customer is prematurely judged as less valuable or important than another customer. (Think about the scene in Pretty Woman when Vivian, played by Julia Roberts, was snubbed by saleswomen based on her immodest appearance while shopping at an upscale boutique along Rodeo Drive.) And, of course, this is wrong.

That said, there are many who will say that all customers should be treated equally. I’d like to make a distinction here between the terms equally and equity:

• Equally means having the same value as another.
• Equity means the state, quality, or ideal of being just, impartial, and fair.

Equally means 50:50. Equity might mean 60:40 or some other unequal ratio—based on what each party needs and deserves.

I have four children. The three oldest receive allowance but their allowance is not equal. The financial needs of my 5^th Grader differ from those of his 1^st Grade sister and their individual allowances reflect that difference. Their allowance is not equal but it is equitable.

In the same way, customers who have flown 100,000 miles with an airline and achieved elite status in its frequent flyer program deserve to board the airplane ahead of those passengers who fly less often. And retail customers with a history of significant spending deserve to be notified of sales before the general public in order to preview the best selection of sale merchandise. These perks may not be spread equally among the customer base but they are distributed equitably.

I agree with Fader’s assertion that “the customer” (a generic term used to represent every customer in a company’s customer base) does not exist because every customer is different. According to Fader, “You must not only accept but celebrate the idea of customer heterogeneity (or uniqueness). By putting forth the effort to better understand the habits, tendencies, and value of each and every one of your customers, you can build better, stronger, and more profitable companies.”

So gather as much intelligence as you can about your company’s very best customers and then look for opportunities to recognize and delight them.

Doing so will reinforce their personal importance (not their importance as people—that’s equality—but their importance as customers) while recognizing the value they bring to the business through personal spending, loyalty and referrals.

I welcome all questions, comments, bouquets and brickbats.

Last week, I brought my car into Car Wash Express to remove the window paint my son had used over the weekend to decorate the car for his playoff football game.

As I pulled up to the attendant’s station, I saw there were three different wash packages offered: $6 Basic Wash, $9 Super Wash, and $12 Ultimate Wash.

The attendant, Dane, asked me which option I would prefer. I responded, “Whichever one will remove this window paint.”

Dane suggested the $9 Super Wash. I agreed, paid for the wash, and pulled my car forward onto the conveyor belt that would pull my car through the automated wash. The wash began with an employee using a scrub brush to manually tackle the obvious spots—in my case, the window paint.

Since the car was being pulled slowly forward on the conveyor belt, the employee was limited on the amount of time he could spend removing the window paint. As a result, after the car wash ended and I pulled forward into the lot, remnants of window paint remained.

Now you might recall that, at the beginning of this post when Dane asked which wash package I wanted to buy, I answered, “Whichever one will remove this window paint.” And he had advised me to purchase the $9 Super Wash.

About this time, Dane appeared beside my driver’s side window and motioned for me to pull back around for a second run through the car wash. When I arrived at the entrance, there was Dane with a bottle of degreaser and a scrub brush. He personally ensured that all of the window paint had been removed before my second trip through the wash.

Let me just say that, based on previous experience in similar situations, Dane’s commitment to ensuring that the window paint had been completely removed was unexpected. Ordinarily, a car wash attendant who processes hundreds of cars each day through an automated facility, would accept payment, issue a receipt, and move on to the next vehicle—very process-focused and transactional.

But Dane chose to express genuine interest in the cleanliness of my car by following up at the end of the wash cycle to ensure the window paint had been removed. And when he saw that traces of the paint remained, he took steps to correct it.

Although my son’s team lost its playoff game, Dane’s follow up won me over as a customer.

Years ago, I sat next to an executive on a flight home to Denver. When he learned that I worked for Marriott, he mentioned that he had achieved Marriott Rewards Platinum Elite status after spending more than 75 nights in Marriott hotels around the world the previous year.

He began to praise the company and, specifically, the consistency of the product and service quality from location to location. While positive feedback is always welcome, I questioned him about problems he may have experienced or any areas in which we could improve.

He thought about it for a moment and replied, “Now that you mention it, there is one thing you can improve.”

He went on to rail against the inconsistency of Marriott’s package delivery process at its hotels. I can still recall the frustration in his voice as he recounted arriving late at night ahead of a morning presentation at the hotel and the staff being unable to account for the packages containing materials for his meeting that had been shipped in advance.

Invariably, after researching and providing tracking numbers and an hour’s worth of phone calls, denials, and finger pointing, the packages would surface in some corner of the hotel. Most of the time, they were being stored in the Shipping and Receiving holding cage and other times they were being held in the bell closet, behind the front desk, or in a sales manager’s office.

“Why can’t your hotels figure this out?” he asked. “It’s not rocket science.”

Fortunately, this conversation coincided with Marriott’s implementation of the GuestWare customer relationship management system and At Your Service® pre-arrival planning and “virtual concierge” program. These initiatives, among other benefits, improved the tracing of guests’ packages and prompted personalized, reassuring, and timely communication with hotel guests.

But this is not a post about process improvement. This post is about the importance of listening—REALLY listening—to your customers. If your goal is to differentiate your company based on customer service quality, consider these takeaways:

1. Solicit feedback from your customers. Most companies solicit feedback from their customers in ways that are more formal and less frequent (e.g., intercept surveys, focus groups, satisfaction surveys, etc.). I’ve found that there’s more integrity to customer feedback that is less contrived and more spontaneous. Look for opportunities to engage your customers that are less formal and more frequent.

2. Seek contrary evidence. While we all appreciate positive feedback, it’s difficult to elevate our performance without realizing the inevitable (and, in some cases, prodigious) opportunities we have for improvement.

3. Listen to your customers. This is not the same as soliciting feedback. It’s one thing to request feedback. It’s another to listen to the feedback in a non-defensive, non-prejudicial way with the intent to truly understand your customer’s perspective.

Here’s a memorable illustration of this lesson:

Part 1: Stew Leonard, Sr., of the renowned supermarket chain bearing his name, once received a written customer suggestion that his store should sell fresh fish. At the time, he was sending a van to Boston each morning to buy fresh fish. As soon as the van returned to the store, the fresh fish was prepared, sealed in plastic wrap on Styrofoam trays, and displayed in the seafood case for shoppers’ perusal.

He could have easily dismissed the suggestion but instead called the customer to inquire further. During that call, he learned that the customer defined fresh fish as being laid loose on ice (rather than sealed in plastic wrap on a Styrofoam tray). He thanked the customer for her feedback and decided to conduct a little experiment at the store.

4. Act on the feedback you receive from customers.

Part 2: The next day, he instructed his seafood department to display half the fresh fish wrapped in plastic as usual. The other half was to be laid loose on ice. One week into the experiment, he found that the fresh fish that had been laid loose on ice outsold the fish wrapped in plastic by a margin of 3:1 and that his gross sales of fresh fish had doubled!

In summary, be intentional about gathering feedback from your customers. Look for untraditional opportunities to engage them in conversations about their experiences (both positive and challenging) with your company’s products and services.

When you really listen to customers, you are expressing genuine interest in them. And by acting on their feedback, you are validating their perspective, reinforcing the relationship, and acknowledging their contribution to the success of your business.

This post is the sixth in a series that will identify 10 different obstacles that have emerged from my analysis of customer satisfaction data. Maybe you will have encountered one or more of these obstacles in your own business? The sixth obstacle is a low-trust service culture.

A low-trust service culture is evidenced by disempowered frontline employees, restrictive policies (especially warranties and returns), and overt skepticism in employees’ approach to problem resolution.

In the fall of 2004 I purchased a to-go order of lasagna from Armando’s, a local Italian restaurant. At home, after eating about one-third of the entrée, I discovered a dead fly in the pasta sauce and quickly lost my appetite. I sealed the remaining lasagna (including the dead fly) in a Ziploc bag and placed it in the refrigerator with plans to return it to the restaurant for a refund.

Within a day or two I stopped by Armando’s with the bag of partially eaten lasagna, shared my story with the employee manning the register, and requested a refund. Instead of demonstrating empathy, the employee suggested that it was not possible for the fly to have originated there, claiming, “We don’t have flies in our kitchen.”

Oh, really?

The implication was that if the fly had not come from his kitchen, then it must have come from mine. Or perhaps I had deliberately planted the fly in order to recoup the $9 cost of the lasagna—although I’d only eaten a portion of it. While he reluctantly agreed to the refund, it was quite obvious that he didn’t trust me or appreciate my feedback.

As I stood at the counter, instead of issuing my refund, the employee accepted another customer’s order, processed the transaction at the register, and then walked over to the oven, removed a pizza, sliced and boxed it, and delivered it to another waiting customer. Only then did he begrudgingly process my refund. It’s as though he was trying to punish me in some perverse way by making me wait a few extra minutes to receive my cash.

After frequenting Armando’s at least monthly for nearly three years, I made a decision that day to never return. And I haven’t.

Since that time, I’ve had two more children and, as a family, we’ve instituted “Family Fun Fridays” which consist of a pizza dinner followed by a movie and popcorn. Due to work schedules and kids’ activities, we miss some Fridays but I estimate that we order about 68 pizzas a year (34 weeks x two pizzas) from competitors of Armando’s: Papa Murphy’s and Anthony’s.

Our average pizza bill is $20 or $680 per year. Since the fall of 2004, we’ve spent about $4,760 on pizzas. If I were to guess, I’d say that Papa Murphy’s has earned about 80% of that total ($3,808) and Anthony’s has received the balance ($952). While these are estimates, I can say with certainty that Armando’s share has been zero.

Armando’s has forfeited its share of $4,760 because an employee exhibited low-trust by questioning the legitimacy of a customer’s feedback and request for a $9 refund.

This is not a unique story. Everyone reading this post has a similar experience to share—perhaps many. The valuable lesson to be learned is this: Be intentional about fostering a high-trust service culture. This commitment should be reflected in the policies of a business and the behavior of its employees.

Will every customer be trustworthy? No. There are unscrupulous customers who will take advantage of liberal return policies and other gestures of high-trust.

But it’s a mistake to scrutinize the motives of 100% of your customers in order to identify the 3% who are trying to take advantage of you. Not only is it a poor use of time and energy, if you offend a customer in the process, it may cost you dearly.

Just look at what it’s costing Armando’s…

Yesterday, I received the message below in an email from a blog reader:

Ever since I passed your blog to my store manager… I have gotten the vibe that (my interest in improved customer service) is viewed like a puppy…cute but meaningless to the Corporation’s ideals… Profit for the shareholder is the requirement of all actions… The image I see is the company has a system it says works. As much as I would (or even my Store Manager would) like to improve Service, unless there is a clear vision of profit in doing so, it’s only a cute puppy…

I understand what he’s saying. I have experienced it personally as an employee, as I suspect most of us have.

Too often, managers with P&L responsibilities see customer service as a soft skill with little impact on the bottom line. Instead, these managers tend to rely on hard data such as revenue, profit margins, and forecasts to influence the operation’s financial success.

This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy whereby managers tend to consistently value and critique “the numbers” while neglecting soft skills like customer service. Employees receive mixed messages: “The posters in the cafeteria tout the company’s commitment to World Class Customer Service but the only feedback I receive pertains to labor and productivity figures.”

It’s as if managers are operating with a day-to-day or week-to-week mentality as opposed to considering the long-term impact of their decisions. And when managers manage this way, employees usually follow their lead.

Just last night at my local Safeway, I witnessed the following confrontation between a cashier and a customer:

As I waited in line, the customer ahead of me was attempting to obtain a rain check for a sale item that was out of stock.

The cashier refused to issue the rain check on the grounds that the sale had ended the previous day. The customer, clearly frustrated, maintained that the sale was valid according to the date published in Safeway’s sales circular.

A line of customers had formed behind me and, as we waited, the customer left the checkout lane in search of a circular to prove his case. About the time he obtained a copy of the ad, a store manager approached him and together they scrutinized the ad’s fine print. As it turned out, the customer was right. The sale was scheduled to expire the following day.

The enlightened cashier then validated a rain check for the out of stock sale item but the damage was done.

I’m not sure what Safeway’s total cost will be to honor the rain check but I can tell you this with certainty: It will be a drop in the bucket compared to the lifetime value of this customer.

I’ve read that the average lifetime value of a supermarket customer is $250,000 (source: V. Kumar, University of Connecticut). This customer looked to be in his mid-40s, presumably with plenty of grocery store purchases in his future. This particular Safeway store is located directly across the street from a competing supermarket, King Soopers, and about a mile away from a second competitor, Albertsons.

This customer has to eat—and within about a five-mile radius he has multiple options to buy groceries that, in addition to the stores listed above, include Walmart Supercenters and SuperTargets as well as specialty grocers like Sprouts and Sunflower Market.

Why on earth would anyone want to jeopardize tens of thousands of dollars in future sales by refusing to issue a rain check for an out of stock sale item? This makes absolutely no sense—regardless of whether or not the sale had expired.

It is well-documented that one of the most effective ways to boost a customer’s lifetime value is to increase customer satisfaction. Research has shown that a 5% increase in customer retention can increase profits by 25% to 95%. The same study found that it costs six to seven times more to gain a new customer than to keep an existing one (source: F. Reichheld, Bain & Company).

Hard data and soft factors do not have to be mutually exclusive. They can be complimentary elements of the same goal: To maximize profitability.

In addition to hard data such as profit margins, market share, and customer retention rates, managers must recognize the influence of soft factors such as customer satisfaction, loyalty, and word-of-mouth testimonials from delighted customers.

They also need to look beyond the near-term operating statement in order to make decisions that will benefit the long-term success of the organization.

When they do, these managers will come to realize that even cute puppies have teeth.

This post is the third in a series that will identify 10 different obstacles that have emerged from my analysis of customer satisfaction data. Maybe you will have encountered one or more of these obstacles in your own business? The third obstacle is customer-unfriendly policies.

I recently stayed at a full-service hotel in Scottsdale, Arizona that offered a nice workout facility with treadmills and stationary bikes facing a set of wall-mounted flat screen televisions. The audio for each television was accessed individually at the exercise equipment in order for each guest to listen to his/her preferred channel. To access the audio, one needed headphones that could be obtained at the front desk.

One evening, while I was awaiting a colleague in the lobby, I overheard a conversation between a front desk agent and a hotel guest. The guest had gone to the workout facility and realized that he needed headphones in order to access the television channel’s audio. When he asked for a set of headphones, the representative said, “I’ll need a photo ID in order to hand out the headphones.”

Now, think about the realities of this situation. You have a guest who is paying about $200 a night to stay in the hotel, who has likely spent the day working and/or traveling to Scottsdale, and who is probably looking forward to a workout before facing another long day in the morning. The guest has changed from his work clothes into shorts and a t-shirt and has left his car keys, driver’s license, and wallet in his hotel room.

The guest explains that, under the circumstances, he does not have a photo ID with him and offered his name and room number in addition to showing the representative his room key. The rep held firm to policy saying, “Our policy requires a photo ID in order to give out headsets. We’ve lost a lot of them in the past.”

Now examine her response. Several things caught my attention:

1.) The word “policy” is contradictory to good service. Customers do not want to hear about policies that stand between them and what they want. Sure, there are necessary policies. For instance, those that address certain legal, ethical, and safety concerns. It is also advisable to have policies in place to protect the company’s assets (as in this case, involving the headphones).

That said, let’s consider the math in this illustration and see if we can identify the real asset. How much for a set of headphones—like the ones the airlines offer free of charge? I just checked on-line and found a set of Coby Ultra-Lightweight Stereo Headphones for $4.99—and that’s if I only bought one set. In quantity they are even cheaper.

Now, let’s try and get past how difficult customers are when they fail to adhere to our policies and take an objective look at what this customer represents in financial terms:

At $200 per night (assuming no ancillary revenue from in-room services, food and beverage, gift shop sales, etc.), after you deduct the costs of preparing the room, in-room amenities, etc., you can figure the hotel captured around $125 in gross profit which may dwindle to around $15 per guest room per night in net profit for the company.

Obviously, the real asset in this example is not the headphones—it’s the customer. Managers (who devise these policies) and front-line employees (who get stuck—and, over time, comfortable—enforcing them) need to understand this. Policies must take into account the customer’s perspective and reinforce the value that the company places on its customers. Doing so will create more opportunities to satisfy customers, gain their loyalty and referrals, and grow the business.

2.) Requiring a photo ID in these situations is inconvenient and insensitive. Most customers making this request will be standing there in their workout clothes and will have left their wallets containing photo IDs back in their rooms. Knowing this reality makes the requirement of showing a photo ID impractical for hotel guests who do not want to hassle with returning to their rooms, waiting on elevators, and perhaps waiting a second time at the front desk if a line forms in their absence.

3.) Saying that “we’ve lost a lot of them in the past” implies that customers are irresponsible or dishonest. It is critical to never offend customers by implying that they are irresponsible or dishonest. If we offend customers, then we are disrespecting them. Most customers will make allowances for a lapse in service. Few will make allowances for disrespect. When disrespected, customers will go out of their way to change providers and will share the negative story with anyone who will listen.

The guest in this situation was appalled at the desk clerk’s reply and lack of empathy. He did not want to spend the next 6 or 8 minutes returning to his room to access his photo ID only to find that the equipment he intended to use was now being used by another guest. His body language told the story: palms flat on the counter, heavy sigh, followed by an abrupt turn away from the rep in the direction of the workout facility.

This guest decided not to joust with the employee who was standing firm on “policy.” Instead, he resigned himself to an audio-less workout—content to read lips on CNN and make his best guess at what the correspondents were reporting.

As service is my business, I find myself observing lots of situations like this one and, on occasion, advocating on behalf of customers. In this case, I offered my photo ID to the rep and requested a set of headphones. She promptly handed them to me and I said, “Great. Now that gentleman will be able to listen to the programming in the fitness center.”

Realizing my intentions, she reverted back to “policy” stating that if the headphones were not returned to the desk, then my room account would be charged $80!

When I approached the guest in the fitness center a minute later and handed him the headphones, he smiled in appreciation and thanked me. It made my day. And to think, the gal at the front desk could have also had a positive exchange with this guest but instead dutifully enforced a customer-unfriendly policy.

Look around your own business. Are there any customer-unfriendly policies in need of revision or, better yet, elimination?

According to a study by J.D. Power and Associates, when a hotel guest’s problem is resolved perfectly, it results in overall satisfaction averaging 80.7, compared to only 74.9 if there was no problem to begin with.

And the more satisfied a hotel guest is, the more he’ll likely spend. The same study found that guests who rate their overall satisfaction as a perfect ten on a ten-point scale, on average, spend about 40 percent more on ancillary services—like hotel restaurants, gift shop, business center, and other offerings—than guests offering a rating of six or seven.

It may seem counter-intuitive for satisfaction to increase when a hotel guest experiences a problem but when you think about the different relationships in your life, it begins to make sense.

All of us have relationships with others ranging from superficial to deep. Superficial relationships are those where conversations revolve around “safe” topics such as the weather, pop culture or the big game. These relationships are rarely tested in any meaningful way. Instead, they are predictable. Loyalty and commitment do not come into play.

We also have relationships that are deeper and more substantial. These are relationships that have been tested—experiencing both highs and lows. We tend to feel more of a responsibility to these relationships. There is greater loyalty and commitment.

J.W. Marriott, Sr. had a favorite poem, Trees, which was inscribed on a piece of wood outside his office door:

The tree that never had to fight for sun and sky and air and light, but stood out in the open plain and always had its share of rain, never became a forest king but lived and died a scrubby thing…Good timber does not grow in ease: The stronger the wind, the tougher the trees.

This poem reinforces the connection between tension and growth. Although it’s human nature to label problems as bad and try to avoid them at all costs, it turns out that the conflict we often encounter as a result of problems experienced may actually reinforce relationships.

A solid relationship, like good timber, does not grow in ease. When customer relationships are tested by the inevitable setbacks that occur in a complex business with lots of moving parts, reframe these problems as opportunities to strengthen relationships.

And be encouraged by the poet’s conclusion: The stronger the wind, the tougher the trees.

Remember the Aesop’s Fable, The Goose with the Golden Eggs?

A man and his wife had the good fortune to own a goose that laid a golden egg every day. Lucky though they were, they soon began to think they were not getting rich fast enough. Imagining the goose must be filled with gold inside, they decided to kill it to obtain all of the gold at once. However, upon cutting the goose open, they found its innards to be like that of any other goose.

The primary moral of this story that many companies would do well to acknowledge is that greed destroys the source of good. In the same way, by nickel and diming customers, many companies are damaging the relationships they have with loyal customers.

My favorite nickel and diming story comes from Bob Farrell, co-founder of Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlors. In his timeless book Give ‘em the Pickle, he shares a letter he received from a customer:

“Dear Mr. Farrell,
I’ve been coming to your restaurants for over three years. I always order a #2 hamburger and a chocolate shake. I always ask for an extra pickle and I always get one. Mind you, this has been going on once or twice a week for three years. I came into your restaurant the other day and I ordered my usual #2 hamburger and chocolate shake. I asked the young waitress for the extra pickle. She said, “Sir, I will sell you a side of pickles for $1.25.”
I told her, “No, I just want one extra slice of pickle. I always ask for it, and they always give it to me. Go ask your manager.” She went away and came back after speaking with the manager. The waitress looked me in the eye and said, “I’ll sell you a pickle for a nickel.”

Needless to say, the customer refused the offer, left the restaurant, and was instantly transformed from a promoter of Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlors, a loyal enthusiast who keeps dining at Farrell’s and urges others to do the same, to a detractor—an unhappy customer who doesn’t return, refuses to recommend Farrell’s, and shares his negative experience with others. In the pursuit of golden eggs, Farrell’s was killing the goose.

Here’s another truly outrageous example of nickel and diming customers:

Ryanair, the Irish discount airline, has taken nickeling and diming passengers to a whole new level. Last year, its CEO announced—with a straight face—that he was working with Boeing to install pay toilets in the airline’s 168 Boeing 737s.

It’s true. Passengers would be required to spend one British pound (about $1.50) to use the toilet. No word yet on options for those passengers who either don’t have cash or don’t have the proper change. I suppose they can cross their legs—assuming there’s sufficient legroom…

And, just today, The Consumerist reported that a class action lawsuit was filed against Hilton for allegedly charging hotel guests 75 cents for newspapers they did not request and believed were provided at no charge.

Any time making money becomes more important than properly serving customers, the business suffers. When the bottom line drives a company’s decisions relative to serving customers, it will begin cutting back on product and service quality in order to improve its near-term operating statement at the expense of long-term customer goodwill and loyalty—not to mention comfort.

If companies genuinely believe that there’s a valid relationship between customer satisfaction and financial results, why would they ever agree to nickel and dime customers to capture another half-percent when they could invest in and deliver exceptional customer service and reap double digit returns on every metric that matters: employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction, market share, revenue, profit, etc.?

The American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) produces scores for the causes and consequences of customer satisfaction and their relationships to, among other things, financial results.

Claes Fornell, Professor of Business Administration at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, oversees the data collection and analysis of the quarterly ACSI results.

According to Fornell, “A five percent improvement in customer satisfaction leads to an increase of over 35 percent of future operational cash flow.” That’s a lot of golden eggs!

He refers to customer satisfaction, or the goose’s health, as “the ultimate economic asset for business, because the sum of the value of all its customer relationships is also the true value of the company.”

If companies would channel the same energy and ingenuity into customer satisfaction that they use to identify and apply creative ways to nickel and dime customers, they would more than recover the revenues gained from these irritating practices.

Instead of nuisance fees, these companies should look for efficiencies and cost containment strategies that will have the least negative impact on customers. By searching for ways to add value rather than fees, they will be caring for the goose—customers—while earning plenty of golden eggs!

Is it me or do you find that merchants are constantly asking you to “take five minutes” and “tell us how we’re doing” by responding to a customer satisfaction survey?

Sometimes these surveys appear in your email box following a purchase. Other times, hard copy surveys arrive in your mailbox or you’re encouraged to access a website and enter a code that’s printed at the bottom of your receipt.

In large part due to the deluge of surveys, response rates are typically abysmal—oftentimes not generating a sufficient number of responses to enable the results to be statistically valid.

It baffles me that companies continue to pour resources into these satisfaction surveys while consistently forfeiting opportunities to engage customers via social media channels.

Case in point: Last weekend, my family and I dined at On The Border. With one exception, we had a terrific experience. On the bottom of my receipt was the message: “YOUR OPINION MATTERS. We invite you to complete our GUEST SATISFACTION SURVEY. YOU COULD WIN $1,000. A WINNER EVERY DAY!”

The receipt also provided a personal code that I was instructed to enter at the survey website: www.onthebordersurvey.com

Instead of following the script laid out by On The Border to share my feedback, I took to my blog and to Twitter—although I could have just as easily taken to Yelp, Facebook, or another social media channel.

That was three days ago and, as of today, I have yet to hear back. You might be saying, “C’mon Steve. It’s only been three days. Cut them some slack.”

Immediacy in addressing problems experienced by customers is paramount. The more time that separates the issue and its resolution, the less likely it is that the problem will be resolved to the customer’s satisfaction. Even On The Border’s receipt instructs guests to respond to its survey within four days.

Frankly, based on previous experiences I’ve had with other organizations, I would be surprised to receive a meaningful response from On The Border. It’s not impossible. It’s just unlikely.

And when a customer’s posted feedback is ignored, that’s a missed opportunity to engage, address any issues raised, and, potentially, cement his ongoing loyalty towards the company or brand.

Why don’t these companies redirect some of their spending on overused “push” strategies to obtain customer feedback and invest in “pulling” this feedback from social media channels? It’s as easy as searching for relevant keywords on Twitter or establishing a Google Alert to notify organizations whenever they have been mentioned by name in cyberspace.

Many customers, like me, may not conform to a company’s standard customer feedback mechanisms but that doesn’t make our feedback any less relevant or valuable.

Companies that recognize this and adjust their feedback gathering and engagement practices accordingly will benefit from candid, real-time customer feedback. Those that don’t will continue to push their rigid feedback systems onto customers and wonder why response rates are so low.

Your opinion matters. Take five minutes and tell me what you think.