Netflix Refunds Money Without Being Asked

from the that's-how-it's-done dept

With so many stories out there of companies screwing over customers or making life difficult for users, it's always nice to hear a good story. Apparently, Netflix recently had a problem with their Xbox video streaming, and proactively refunded money to customers without them asking. I can't think of any other company I've heard of that's done that. Hell, I remember a past broadband provider who I would call (regularly) without outages, and the best they would do is say that after the service came back, I could call and then they would process a refund -- knowing that when that finally happened hours later, it wouldn't be worth the hassle to call back in and wait on hold.

32 Comments | Leave a Comment..

In A Connected World, Where Everyone Has A Voice, Customers Win

from the welcome-to-the-modern-world dept

One of the key underlying themes about the posts we write here -- whether they're about RIAA lawsuits or public policy or business models or security through obscurity or anything else, really -- is that one of the amazing things about the internet is that it gives everyone a voice. And when everyone has a voice, the customer wins. Period. Customers will always be able to get the word out if you screw them over, and so any business has to be focused on providing positive value to customers, not pissing them off. A great example of how old school companies still don't get this (and what happens in response) was sent in by Jeremy Oudit, alerting us to how singer Dave Carroll dealt with a horrible customer service experience with United Airlines. Basically, United broke an expensive guitar in transit and refused to do anything about it. So, he started writing songs about United's terrible customer service and put them on YouTube, along with the story, and they're getting hundreds of thousands of views:

This is just the first of at least three songs on the subject, called "United Breaks Guitars"... How much does all that bad publicity cost? How much would it have cost to have compensated Dave for the broken guitar?

38 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Sounding Human: The Difference Between Good And Bad Customer Service

from the is-it-really-that-hard? dept

I'm writing up the beginning of this post while on an airplane, flying from New York to San Francisco. By the time you've read it, I'll have added some stuff to it after I landed. The issue is one of customer service and sounding human. Late last week, I saw this amusing online customer service chat transcript between a Zappos customer service representative and a guy who wanted to see if their customer service really was as good as advertised. Zappos is famous for its hiring and training practices (including paying people to quit after a month). With the customer service team, there are no scripts and reps aren't measured on how many calls they get through like many other customer service centers, but on how well they help customers. That is really evident in the transcript. Here's an excerpt, though you should read the whole thing:

You are now chatting with Jonathan
Jonathan: Hello Timmy. How can I help you?
Timmy: do you know how wide the G-Shock Atomic Solar - AWG101 SKU #7403774 is?
Timmy: i mean, how big a wrist it would fit?
Timmy: Timmy has a big fat wrist
Timmy: Timmy need watch grande
Jonathan: I'll see what I can find out for Timmy.
Timmy: awesome. and can we please continue to talk about Timmy in the 3rd person? Timmy likes to boost Timmy's ego by talking about Timmy that way
Jonathan: Jonathan would be happy to neglect the use of pronouns for the duration of this conversation.
Timmy: Jonathan and Timmy shall get along just fine
Jonathan: Will Timmy be able to measure Timmy's wrist?
Timmy: Timmy's wrist is big, but not Biggie-Smalls big. Timmy doesn't have the required measurement instruments.
Timmy: Timmy is 6'4" 220lbs if that helps Jonathan
Jonathan: Luckily, that is roughly the size of Jonathan's brother, so that does help.

Now, as I mentioned, I'm writing this from an airplane, where I had hoped to have in-flight internet access. I had it last week on the flight from San Francisco to NY and it was fabulous. And, yes, I've seen the wonderful and enlightening Louis CK bit where he talks about how ridiculous it is that anyone would complain that in-flight WiFi broke, because just think of how amazing it is (by the way, in later interviews, Louis admitted that it wasn't the guy sitting next to him who complained -- but he was really discussing his own reaction to the WiFi breaking). I'm not at all upset that the WiFi broke. It would have been cool (and useful in terms of productivity), but I am amazed that it could work at all, and I know it's new so bound to have some hiccups. That's fine. This post isn't about the fact that the WiFi broke. It's about the way Aircell/GoGo handled it.

It's not at all clear what the problem was exactly. When I first opened up the browser, the proxy server page wouldn't load at all. After a few minutes it did load, and at the top it said: "click buy to get started." Only problem? There was no "buy" to click. Just a big empty white box. However, there was a link to sign in if you already had an account -- which, thanks to my flight last week, I did. So I clicked that, and put in my username/password, and was told that it couldn't authenticate it. I checked my email to confirm the username, and even though I'm sure of the password, tried to go to "recover forgotten password" just in case... and was told it didn't recognize my username or the email address. Fine. It seemed pretty clear that their authentication system had broken down, too. I tried to go back to the main page, but it told me I couldn't until I had purchased my account...

However, I did notice a link to "contact customer service" and discovered that even though I couldn't connect to the full internet, I could have a "live chat" with a customer service rep on the ground named "Georgia." I'm asked my name, and I give it (even though it should have been obvious from the email address I had to give to login to the chat). After Georgia asked for my name and I gave it, it took about 2 minutes for a reply. No problem... I'm sure Georgia is dealing with others as well. But I'm not even sure if she's still there. Then I'm asked the problem, which I describe and am told:

"I apologize for the inconvenience and I'll be glad to help you with that."

Sounds great. So I wait. And wait. And wait. And then start wondering... am I supposed to do anything? I assume it's being looked into, but it's not at all clear. I wasn't told to wait. I was just told that she can help. But is she? So after about 5 minutes of nothing, I say "Hello?" and get a quick apology followed by a statement that they are aware of a problem on my flight and will be monitoring it, and if I'm unable to connect, they'll send me a gift code for future flights. Ok. That's fine again... but what does that mean directly for me. I ask "so should I just try again later?" and am told "I would suggest you reboot and try again."

Wait... what? I was just told the problem was with GoGo's system, so why would it make sense to tell me to reboot? I point this out in a polite manner, and am told: "It may help, yet it may not be resolved until after your flight is over." Beyond the odd use of pronouns (first "it" refers to rebooting, second "it" refers to the problem with their system), this again sounds like someone with a script, rather than anyone trying to sound human or recognize how silly it is for me to reboot after she's already admitted the problem is on her end.

Given that I was clearly communicating with someone on the ground, I figured it was worth asking if there was some way around the authentication issue, since clearly I could connect to a very limited subset of the internet on the ground. I'm then told "all ways to sign in and sign up are not properly working." Aha, so it really is a problem with their system, and not my own, but why couldn't they have just explained that problem initially so that I understood? I tell her that I'll just try to sign on later, and am asked "Is there anything else I can help you with?" Now, I understand this is rather standard closing question... but it seems rather silly in this context. Considering there's no connectivity and that's the only thing this company provides, I'm not sure what else I could possibly be helped with.

Now, this wasn't a bad customer service experience (even if it didn't resolve the problem, though that wasn't "Georgia's fault"). But it was striking to me the contrast between what I had just read with the Zappos transcript and this one. Is it really that difficult for customer service reps to sound human?

50 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Does Google Need An Ombudsman?

from the couldn't-hurt... dept

Lauren Weinstein has an interesting discussion going on his blog, noting a series of recent incidents where Google has done a spectacularly poor job in communicating with the public -- something I've been critical of the company about, as well. The company can be notoriously secretive at times, even when being a lot more transparent would help. Even worse, the company is quite difficult to contact on many issues, unless you happen to know people there already. Its response times, if you go through the "official channels," are absolutely ridiculous (if they respond at all). Weinstein's suggestion, then, is that Google should set up a small team to play an ombudsman role -- basically acting as the public's "representative" within the company. This wouldn't be a "customer support" role (which is often focused on fixing problems directly) as much as a helping hand within the company. The team could take up issues sent in by the public, find the proper folks within the company and get a real response. While the company may fear that such a group would be overrun by complaints, you would think that it could pretty quickly classify the incoming requests into real issues vs. bogus ones, and concentrate on the real issues. Having such a group could certainly help ease the growing view that Google is something of a monolithic entity that walls itself off from the public that uses it.

9 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Dear Verizon: I Haven't Been An MCI Customer In Four Years

from the customer-service dept

About five or six years ago, I had landline phone service from MCI. In the age before VoIP was common, MCI had a service called "The Neighborhood" which was like many VoIP services today, but without the VoIP part. Unlimited calls for a single flat rate and such advanced (at the time!) features as emailing you your voicemails. It wasn't a bad deal, and I used it for a year or two, until I was getting ready to move. VoIP services had become popular, so I transferred that phone line to a VoIP account and canceled the MCI service in 2004. And that was that. Or so I thought. In 2006, Verizon bought what was left of a scandal-ridden MCI, and as far as I knew, the MCI brand had pretty much gone away.

Yet, in the last couple of weeks, I've received a barrage of robocalls from MCI, letting me know that my credit card is expiring, and I need to log into mci.com to update the card. The call notes that my bill is automatically charged to this credit card and if I want to "continue enjoying this convenience" I need to update soon. The call is correct in that the credit card I used back when I had MCI expired this month, but is it that hard for Verizon (or whoever it is) to recognize that the very phone number they're calling me on hasn't been connected to MCI service in four years and that the company has not, in fact, billed me during that time? And, honestly, why did they hang onto my credit card info for so long? And, finally, why call me three times a day with no way for me to tell them to knock if off? I thought perhaps this was a new form of phishing, but the call directs you to log into mci.com itself, so it sounds like it's legit. Either way, it raises plenty of questions about MCI (and now Verizon's) data handling practices.

28 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Netflix Changes Its Mind, Will Keep Profiles

from the listening-to-customers-is-good dept

A few weeks back, we were one of many who questioned Netflix's decision to take away its "profiles" feature, that allows a single account holder to have separate queues for different people in his or her household. For the folks who used this feature, it was quite popular, and our main complaint was the bogus language that Netflix used, claiming that removing this feature was somehow a benefit to users. Obviously, most folks who used that feature regularly thought it was somewhat obnoxious to take away a favorite feature and to tell them it was for their own good -- despite not having any plans for a replacement.

However, Netflix surprised a lot of folks by actually listening to the complaints from many users and agreeing to keep the feature, though it won't promise to do any more enhancements to it. It's so rare to hear of companies actually listening to their users, that it's nice to see Netflix actually do so. Of course, Netflix could potentially make even more fans of the company by somehow opening up the profiles platform so that others could develop for it -- now that Netflix doesn't want to do so. That may not be possible depending on how things are set up, but that could really turn what was a negative into a strong positive for the company.

14 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Zappos Paying Employees To Quit; Recognizing That Customer Service Isn't A Cost Center

from the fascinating dept

Let me admit upfront that when Zappos first came along, I didn't think much of it. The founder had done amazingly well for himself in selling LinkExchange to Microsoft during the bubble years, and had then started a incubator called Venture Frogs -- with (I kid you not) a corresponding restaurant (also called Venture Frogs). The restaurant wasn't bad, even if all the dishes were named after dot com companies. I remember eating there (I think I got the CNET Curried Chicken) one day and seeing huge signs all over the restaurant for Zappos -- an online shoe store. This was pretty much near the bottom of the downswing after the dot com bubble had burst, so it was quite surprising to see someone opening up a pure e-commerce startup, especially one in a category that had failed miserably in the past. E-commerce for shoes seemed exceptionally difficult, due to the fact that shoe sales (even more than other clothing) really depend on the unique fit of each item. However, over the years, Zappos overcame all of the concerns by lowering the barriers (super fast free shipping and free returns on anything that you don't like) and an almost maniacal focus on customer service. In doing so, it's built up a hugely loyal set of customers -- including me.

Of course, to do that right, it's meant treating customer service not as a "cost center," like almost all companies these days, but as an integral part of making happy, committed customers who also act as evangelists. A good company recognizes that customer service isn't a cost center at all, but the best way to build a loyal customer base and to learn from your customers as well. Of course, in order to do that, you need to have a loyal, committed customer service staff as well -- and Zappos has done some unique things there that are worth understanding. It doesn't do many of the typical call center things: no scripts, no time limits on calls and no limits on what the customer service reps can do to make customers happy. But, in a post on a Harvard Business blog, it's explained that Zappos also offers to pay each new employee $1,000 to quit, one month after they've joined. Basically, it's offering any employee who's not truly committed to the way the company does business an easy "out" after one month. Thus, those who stick around are even more committed to living up to the service ideals the company has set. It's nice to see in an era where "good customer service" seems so rare.

Apparently about 10% of folks take the money and scram. While traditional HR metrics might think this is terrible, as the cost of recruiting, hiring and training new employees is quite high, the long term benefits of having a more strongly committed staff cannot be overstated. Basically, the company has realized that a little cost upfront can help it make a lot more on the backend.

19 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Comcast Cares -- But Only About People Like You

from the @techdirtcares dept

You might've already heard about the Twitter account @comcastcares. Run by Comcast employee Frank Eliason, its purpose is to find upset customers before they even know they're looking for help. I'd heard of Eliason's project, but had completely forgotten about it when, on Sunday, I found my HD service mysteriously missing and broadcast my frustration to the Twitterverse. Frank's immediate Twittered response was unexpected and reassuring. When the next day's service call proved fruitless, he asked me to email him. Within a few hours I had received phone calls and emails from three different smart and seemingly concerned Comcast employees, and by the evening my problem was solved. I had been prepared to settle in for a weeks-long fight with the cable company. Instead, Frank's quick intervention left me feeling oddly positive about a company that I had long considered to be more or less the embodiment of of malevolent, slothful incompetence.

I'm not the only one who's noticed Frank's project, of course. Mike Arrington wrote about a positive encounter with @comcastcares earlier this month. And although Dave Winer remained peeved by his cable internet woes, it's clear that he found @comcastcares helpful and worthwhile.

It certainly is those things. But is it anything more? Arrington is right, of course, when he says that more brands should be using Twitter as a buzz monitoring tool. But we should all keep in mind that the sort of concierge-style customer support offered by @comcastcares is unlikely to ever scale beyond the size of a PR exercise.

In this case Twitter's chief virtue is its userbase: a collection of highly-wired early adopters whose online complaints about cable provider malfeasance frequently find their way into press accounts and Google results associated with the company. As handy a notification system as Twitter is, it's not as if it offers a technological breakthrough that suddenly makes competent customer service possible: there's been nothing preventing Comcast support from answering email, or getting on IM, or even just using a phone system that calls clients back rather than making them sit on the phone until they hang up or are driven mad by the hold music.

The reason Comcast and companies like it don't do those things is simply that providing high-quality, personalized support is expensive. Providing high-quality support to influential users is expensive, too, but there are many fewer of them and they make a lot more noise, which makes it a better investment. I'm sure Frank isn't undertaking his project cynically, but it's hard to see how Twitter can change the economics of tech support.

Tom Lee is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Tom Lee and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

19 Comments | Leave a Comment..

E-Commerce Still Sucks When It Comes To Customer Experience

from the still? dept

Back in the early days of e-commerce, it wasn't too surprising to see the various studies saying that people often had bad e-commerce experiences, but you would hope that these days it wouldn't be so common. Unfortunately, a new study suggests that plenty of people are still having terrible customer service experiences with various e-commerce sites. And, of course, those bad experiences are leading them to do less business with the companies. Obviously, things fall through the cracks here and there and not every customer experience is going to be perfect -- but you wouldn't expect it to be so bad that nearly 90% of people surveyed said they'd had a bad e-commerce experience lately.

14 Comments | Leave a Comment..

NetFlix Hopes Good Customer Service Will Keep Mail Boxes Stuffed With Red Envelopes

from the nice-talking-with-you dept

Although Blockbuster sat on its heels for a long time while NetFlix gobbled up market share, the company has aggressively fought back this year, prompting a lot of pain at NetFlix. NetFlix stock has been pummeled lately as its been drawn into a price war in order to stem customer churn. The problem is that its business model is easily replicated, which partly explains the company's attempt to assert a patent on it. However, the company does appear willing to actually compete, which is refreshing. The New York Times reports on the company's unorthodox decision to offer customer support services from friendly sounding Oregonions (as the company puts it), rather than rely on offshoring or email support. Although this is an expensive move, the company feels it will prove to be a key differentiator as it battles back Blockbuster. Obviously, good customer support means happier customers, while bad customer support can turn customers away. But the lesson isn't that companies should immediately stop all offshoring of these services. Rather, it's important for companies to think of customer support strategically and weigh the various costs and benefits, rather than just going on the lowest-price option.

30 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Dell Spends $150 Million On Customer Service Improvements... And Its Customer Service Ranking Falls

from the ouch dept

Dell clearly had a pretty major reputation problem when it came to customer service for much of this budding century. Despite problems going back for many years, it took way too long for Dell to admit it had a problem that needed fixing. Unfortunately, whatever it's doing isn't exactly working. John Paczkowski notes that, despite spending $150 million to improve customer service, the latest customer satisfaction rankings from the American Customer Satisfaction Index show Dell dropping 5%. Ouch. While some are reasonably calling the methodology of these rankings into question, that still can't be what Dell hoped to see. Of course, much of the customer satisfaction ratings may be a hangover effect from earlier bad experiences, or the massive publicity around some high profile bad customer service experiences at Dell. If that's the case, though, Dell will probably need to go beyond just fixing its current customer service problems to getting the word out that it really has changed. That means admitting the mistakes of the past while making the changes quite transparent.

92 Comments | Leave a Comment..