In my seminars, I talk a lot about job function and job essence. To me, recognizing the difference between them is central to understanding why customer service delivery is so predictably poor.

Awareness is key. People don’t know what they don’t know.

The first thing I would do to increase awareness and improve the quality of customer service delivery in any business is to ask my employees this question: “Would you describe for me, from your perspective, what you do—what your job entails?”

When I pose this question to employees I encounter in hotels, shopping malls, supermarkets, or airports, the responses I receive almost always apply exclusively to job function—the tasks or duties associated with one’s job role.

Here’s how a typical conversation with a supermarket employee might go:

Me: “Pardon me. Do you mind if I ask you what you do—what your job entails?”

Employee: “Are you from corporate headquarters or something?”

Me: “No. I’m just interested in what you do.”

Employee: “Well, my job is to sack groceries but when we’re not busy, I bring in shopping carts from the lot and sweep the store. Sometimes I have to check prices or clean up spills. That’s about it.”

Let’s examine this response:

• Sack groceries (job function)
• Bring in shopping carts (job function)
• Sweep the store (job function)
• Check prices (job function)
• Clean up spills (job function)

Every action listed has to do with job function. Rarely do employees reference actions or behaviors pertaining to job essence which, ironically, is their highest priority.

Job essence for employees at most companies is to create delighted customers, promoters—those who will enthusiastically recommend the company or brand to others, are less price-sensitive, and have higher repurchase rates.

While groceries need to get sacked and carts need to be brought in, if these tasks are completed without a smile, without enthusiasm, without attention to detail, or without genuine interest, the customer will notice.

In the absence of job essence, all that exists is a transaction. Transactions are not memorable. Transactional service does not make a lasting positive impression or inspire loyalty.

This begs the question: “Why do so many of the employees Steve interviews only cite job function and not job essence?”

Consider this: Job function is results oriented. Managers are interested in results. Job function is doing what your told. Managers appreciate compliance. Job function is doing what’s expected. Managers don’t like surprises.

Until managers actively model, recognize, and reward job essence, achieving results will take priority over establishing relationships, compliance will trump initiative, and customer service will be characterized by routine and predictable actions.

What they (employees) see is what you’ll (management) get. And most employees see job function being recognized and rewarded over job essence.

For instance, let’s assume the supermarket employee, during his new-hire orientation program, was told how important it was to provide exceptional customer service. Perhaps he was shown a mission statement, a poster, or was given a button to wear that contained the company’s customer service slogan. He was also made aware of his job duties which include gathering the stray shopping carts from throughout the parking lot.

Being enthusiastic about his new job role and wanting to perform well, the employee is conscientious when bagging groceries. He is careful to handle delicate items such as bread and eggs carefully and bag frozen food together to prevent it from thawing too quickly. He also insists on helping customers to their cars—especially when the weather’s bad—even though most of his coworkers avoid this step.

During his first several weeks in his new position, the employee is routinely approached by his manager who asks, “Hey, why are there so many carts in the parking lot?” But he never receives any feedback about the exceptional customer service he provides to shoppers.

So he’s conflicted: “During orientation they told me how important it was to take care of the customer. I try to do that but no one seems to notice or care. The only thing I ever receive feedback on is the shopping carts in the parking lot.”

It doesn’t take him long to learn that the way he’s going to score points with his manager is by spending more time in the parking lot, away from customers, retrieving stray shopping carts.

I recognize that job function is necessary—even critical (i.e., the shopping carts must be retrieved from the parking lot and the floor needs to be swept periodically) but it does not represent the totality of an employee’s job! It only represents a portion of his job. The other portion of his job, which is often neglected, is job essence—his highest priority: to create a delighted customer—a promoter.

When employees are made aware of the essence of their jobs and it’s reinforced (modeled, recognized, rewarded) by their immediate supervisors, then customer service quality will improve, fewer eggs will get broken, and we’ll begin asking the question, “Why is customer service so predictable great?”

It’s my blog. I can dream.

Most of us acknowledge that when we’re performing our jobs, we are working.

But what many employees don’t often consider is that their jobs are made up of both mandatory actions that fulfill job functions (i.e., the bullet points on a job description) as well as optional behaviors that fulfill job essence—their highest priority (which, for most service-based businesses, is creating delighted customers).

Most work environments reinforce mandatory job functions through job descriptions, standard operating procedures (SOPs), checklists, etc., and pay little attention to the optional behaviors that, in the end, are the difference between an ordinary transaction and a memorable experience.

Here’s a quick example from the retail industry:

A couple of weeks ago, while in the checkout line at the supermarket, I had a chance to observe the cashier’s interaction with the customer ahead of me.

Typically these interactions are transactional: a screen displays the total, the customer swipes a bank card and signs for her purchases, the cashier presents a receipt, and the customer (9 times out of 10) thanks the cashier—presumably for accepting her money.

The cashier has completed a set of mandatory actions that fulfill her job function. But nothing stood out. No impression was made. An opportunity to make a connection was lost—forever…

But on this particular day, as she scanned a bag of dog food, the cashier asked, “What kind of a dog do you have?”

With that, the cashier and the customer had an enthusiastic exchange about their mutual love of Labrador Retrievers. It wasn’t long—maybe all of 20 seconds—while the customer swiped his bank card and signed for his purchases.

The cashier, by simply posing a question, expressed genuine interest in the customer and transformed a bland and uneventful transaction into a unique and memorable experience. An impression was made. A connection was established.

The cashier’s question was optional and fulfilled the essence of her job: to create a delighted customer. And because questions like these are optional, as customers we don’t always receive them. But when we do, they tend to leave a lasting positive impression.

Perhaps when the customer returns to the store, he will quickly scan the checkout lanes to see whether or not his “friend” is working and, if so, may go out of his way to queue in her line. The cashier may even recognize him and, recalling their previous conversation, ask about his dog.

This is how relationships form. This is how customer loyalty is earned. Customers don’t establish relationships with stores, they establish relationships with the people inside the stores.

Good customer service is rarely the result of perfectly executed mandatory job functions. Rather, it is most often the result of optional behaviors such as expressing genuine interest (e.g., “What kind of a dog do you have?”) and offering sincere and specific compliments (e.g., “You couldn’t have picked a breed with a better disposition.”) that fulfill job essence.

Good customer service is always optional. That’s why we rarely experience it.

Earlier this week, a friend of mine passed along a copy of Daniel Pink’s latest book, Drive. It was a pleasant surprise because, having read his bestseller, A Whole New Mind, it was on my buy list. One of the reasons I enjoy reading authors like Daniel Pink, Malcolm Gladwell, Thomas Friedman, and others, is that they consistently challenge deeply held assumptions that I’ve guarded for years.

And while Drive opened in this way—causing me to rethink what I’d previously accepted as truth—I soon read a sentence that reaffirmed what I’ve known to be true for years: “Work consists of whatever a body is OBLIGED to do, and Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do.”

The implication of this truth, as it applies to my work in the field of customer service, is that to the extent employees see their jobs as a series of algorithmic tasks (the bullet points that make up so many job descriptions) as opposed to heuristic tasks (opportunities to “perform” outside of one’s job description), they will most likely focus on job function (the algorithmic tasks associated with their job role) at the expense of job essence (the heuristic tasks that contribute to their highest priority).

What’s their highest priority? For most customer service employees it’s to create delighted customers—those who will repurchase, be less price-sensitive, and recommend the company or brand to others.

The disconnect I most often experience as a customer of an airline, hotel, restaurant, or department store, is that employees tend to execute their jobs as a series of algorithmic tasks (e.g., issuing a boarding pass, obtaining a valid method of payment, taking an order, or ringing up a purchase) that they would define as work. In some cases, they might even define these tasks as routine or monotonous. And whenever customers detect monotony from employees, it contributes to perceptions of bland, uneventful, and indifferent customer service.

The opportunity then lies in reframing employees’ views of their job roles. That is, expanding job descriptions from a myopic set of required algorithmic tasks that focus on job function to include optional heuristic tasks that support job essence.

Here is what it might look like in a hotel:

Among other job tasks, a front desk agent’s job description presumably includes obtaining a valid method of payment from each guest prior to issuing a room key. That’s an example of an algorithmic job task (i.e., following a set of established instructions) that fulfills the employee’s job function of checking-in guests. In many hotels, employees and guests alike would characterize this procedure as transactional, process-focused, and predictable—each one like the last one.

Now imagine the above algorithmic job task being completed in a way that fulfills the employee’s job function while, at the same time, supports the essence of her job role: to create a delighted customer.

Perhaps the desk agent smiles, makes eye contact with the guest, and says, “That’s a lovely tie. It matches your suit nicely. Who is the designer?” The guest, flattered by the remark, may then proudly answer, “Louis Vuitton” or “Robert Talbott.” Either way, he will be complimented that she noticed and will likely characterize the experience as exceptional, guest-focused, and unexpected. And while he probably won’t recall the transaction at all, he’ll remember the compliment for a long, long time.

All the desk agent did was expand her job description from a defined set of required algorithmic tasks (i.e., obtaining a valid method of payment from the guest) focused on job function (i.e., checking-in a guest) to include an optional heuristic task (i.e., providing a sincere and specific compliment) that supports job essence (i.e., to create a delighted customer). In doing so, she expressed her own uniqueness and creativity by doing something that was entirely optional and beyond the confines of her job description.

The late J.W. Marriott, Sr. said it well when he reflected on his own view of work: “There weren’t these two opposites, work and play, one bad and the other good. It was having a vision of the way things ought to be and then making them that way.”

That quote really encapsulates the message of this post. To the extent that employees view their jobs as a series of others-directed obligations, their jobs will seem more like work—with all the limitations and monotony associated with it. And to the extent that employees exercise their freedom to self-direct their performance using a variety of optional techniques, their jobs will seem more like play—with all the freedom and satisfaction associated with it.

Comments? (Please don’t feel obligated…they’re optional.)

I read a Wall Street Journal article this week by Timothy W. Martin titled, Choice Advice From Meat Cutters. The article highlighted the benefits of training butchers at leading supermarket chains to engage customers as a chef rather than as simply a meat cutter. The difference separates a memorable, customer-focused experience from an ordinary, process-focused transaction at the meat counter.

As the scale of operations have grown at most supermarkets, many meat cutters disappeared from the meat cases to backrooms where interactions with shoppers were limited to announcements over the intercom. Their roles shifted from a familiar butcher who formed close bonds with shoppers, remembering names and preferences (people-focused), to an anonymous meat cutter whose priority was churning out enough hamburger patties and chuck steaks to fill meat cases (process-focused).

In the article, Frank Thurlow, director of meat and seafood merchandising at Winn-Dixie Stores, observed, “Meat cutters have a reputation for not being the most personable, outgoing types of individuals. I mean, we sit in the back room all day and cut up animals.”

So, how do you address this perception and change it in order to increase sales at the meat counter while boosting employee morale and job satisfaction?

There are many factors including vital processes such as the selection and onboarding of employees. The quality of customer service provided by an employee will never exceed the quality of customer service he or she is ready, willing, and able to deliver. The scope of this blog post cannot take into account every variable, so I’ll just focus on the obvious one: sharing unique knowledge.

Unique knowledge is not the same as job knowledge. Job knowledge is necessary for an employee to be proficient in his or her job role. It is expected by the customer and, generally speaking, is transactional—not memorable. Unique knowledge, when provided by the employee, is unexpected, refreshing, valued, and memorable. It’s the sizzle!

To illustrate the difference, read this testimonial from Aram Dakarian, meat manager at Jewel supermarket in Chicago: “Before, I’d tell customers just to squeeze out the blood and add some salt and pepper (job knowledge).” Now he eagerly offers cooking tips (unique knowledge). For example, for baked chicken, he recommends olive oil with a dash of lemon pepper. For steaks, a garlic or peppercorn seasoning rub, or two hours soaking in a wine sauce marinade.

Instead of simply sharing job knowledge: A flat-iron steak is cut from the shoulder of a steer, he can add more value by sharing unique knowledge: How to properly grill a flat-iron steak and the difference between dry (grilled or broiled) and wet (simmering or braising) cooking.

Grocers are banking on shoppers’ willingness to pay higher shelf prices in return for general dinner advice. And there is also a benefit to employees as described by Mr. Dakarian: “Now, I’m getting more in-depth with the meat, looking at it more like a chef. It makes me feel good.”

While customers appreciate nice employees, they value knowledgeable employees. And the more unique knowledge employees possess, the more value they bring to the customer experience.

Language, it seems, has become pretty casual in many customer service settings. I’ve had waiters refer to me as “man” and hear “no problem” from frontline employees, as well as their supervisors, in a variety of situations.

We can all think of alternatives to referring to a customer as “man” so I won’t belabor that, but what about “no problem” in response to a customer’s request or sign of appreciation.

Many participants who attend my seminars don’t immediately understand why saying “no problem” to a customer should be avoided. It’s understandable. Most people are comfortable with saying “no problem” rather than “you’re welcome” after receiving a request for service or compliment.

“No problem” really means “No problem for me.” It means “I did it because it did not cause me a problem. I served you because it did not interfere with me.” That is very different from “you’re welcome” which means “You are welcome to my service to you.”

Besides “you’re welcome” here are some other alternatives to saying “no problem” in response to a customer’s request for service or sign of appreciation:

• “My pleasure.”
• “Right away.”
• “Absolutely.”
• “Certainly.”
• “Of course.”
• “Definitely.”

Responses like these send a message that you are enthusiastic and genuinely interested. They demonstrate confidence and conviction. Responses like these convey a sense that you are engaged and truly want to serve the customer.

And the negative associations don’t end with “No problem.” The use of seemingly neutral words can also make a big difference.

Using a hotel example, imagine the employee is conveying to the guest when his or her hotel room will be available.

Consider the statements below. What differences do you see in them?

• “I will have a room ready for you in five minutes.”
• “I will have the room ready for you in five minutes.”
• “I will have your room ready for you in five minutes.”

Although only one word has been changed, each statement has a different emotional impact. The first conveys nothing definite: It could be any room, just as it could be anyone’s room. The second implies that at the least, a specific room has been allocated to the guest. But notice that control of it has not yet begun to pass. The third example says that not only has a room been identified but, in effect, it already belongs to the guest. The only issue remaining is how long it will take to have it ready.

Suppose you were the guest in the above scenario and the employee had said “a few minutes” instead of “five minutes.” What effect would that have had? From the employee’s point of view, very little. From the guest’s point of view, however, perhaps a lot. Five minutes is objective. It conditions the customer’s expectation of time and provides a clue to how proficient the experience will be.

Words convey meaning. Employees must be made aware of the (sometimes subtle and other times significant) impact that their choice of words has on how customers are made to feel (important or unimportant) and the positive impression they will remember—or the indifferent transaction they will soon forget.

How about you? What are some communication faux pas you regularly experience as a customer?