Tonight was a another great episode of Undercover Boss on CBS. It blows my mind that it took a TV show and a TV network to help open up the eyes of these ivory tower execs.
Tonight's episode showed a spoiled rotten brat of a CEO getting his life lesson and seeing what his employees really mean to his organization. Sheldon Yellen of Belfor breaking down in front of his employees was gut-wrenching, but quite honestly, it's what all these millionaire cry-babies need to hear and see. The front line people MAKE THE DIFFERENCE! No company will exist without people like these!
Could you replace Jen, Brenda, Joe or Drew with other employees? Of course you could. But what Sheldon learned and what other CEOs will learn when they spend time with their front line employees is that there are AMAZING wonderful people out there who do their jobs but are also passionate about making the organization better and are being ignored by the oblivious cold nature of organizations today.
We've so insulated our companies with reporting structures, human resource departments that treat employees like cattle (no offense to my HR friends implied!) that we've no feeling of what those people who do the day to day work mean and that they are real people living real lives with real problems. Sheldon Yellen bought off some of his grief by helping his employees to offset their debts which will pay short-term gains. Will he change and be true to the new Sheldon image he portrayed at the end of the episode? It's hard to say.
This kind of "day in the shoes" moment would be eye-opening if not life-altering for most execs; it kinda makes you wonder why other CEOs and C-level execs don't have the nerve to do the same.
So here's one man's open call to all CEO's and execs who aren't connected to the people who do the actual work bringing in revenue each day -- take a day out of the posh office and private jets, cushy lunches and country clubs world and step into your employees shoes' for at least a day and see why the disconnect growing ever larger makes your company worse EVERY day. The dividends you lose for 24 hours of not being in your office will be repaid in spades of loyalty, understanding and newfound talent when you see what awaits you in the ranks.
Who's got the guts to do it? If you need help connecting to your front lines or finding a way to connect to your people and you can't find any one in your organization to help you sort out how to make it work, call me and we'll find a way.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Are you taking full advantage?
Are you taking full advantage of your website?
For instance, your web site likely has a search functionality for people to find your location/locations. Do you track where those searches come from and what people are looking for? Can your website and analytics tell you where you should put your next store? If you have 25,000 searches in a month in an area where you don't already have a presence, should you?
The tools are there -- we just need to make sure we're using them all as intelligently as possible.
For instance, your web site likely has a search functionality for people to find your location/locations. Do you track where those searches come from and what people are looking for? Can your website and analytics tell you where you should put your next store? If you have 25,000 searches in a month in an area where you don't already have a presence, should you?
The tools are there -- we just need to make sure we're using them all as intelligently as possible.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Customer Service is back in style...
I'm a believer.... in eBay.
I'm sitting on my couch in near complete disbelief. I saw a trend starting early in the 1990's (some will say earlier or later) where customer service became scarce and unimportant and the focus was on becoming bigger, better, more efficient, less caring, less individual and always -- more profitable. It was a concerning trend because people were not the focus, money, tech and growth were. It made for a great bubble and made for some quick millionaires. It was also extremely short-sighted and led immediately afterward to the natural byproduct of greed and hubris -- a fall! We've all seen the effects of that.
In any case, this is a long-winded way to say that I'm becoming a believer in customer service coming back in vogue, and some very big companies leading the charge. Take, for instance, eBay. I had written a scatching blog entry detailing an issue I had with eBay, the Post Office and a seller who didn't quite follow his own rules. I took issue mostly with eBay, because they had a program in place to provide buyer protection when customers were short-changed or didn't get what they ordered. It's a wise move on their part to have a program like that, particularly because there are some less than reputable folks selling on eBay. They also do have programs in place to eliminate that kind of chaff -- and I've always felt like doing business on eBay was pretty safe. So I was blown away when I contacted their buyer protection team and got shut down completely. Then I received an e-mail talking about how valuable this program was, which included the CEO's name. It was somewhat like throwing kerosene on a fire -- I was still pretty irritated with eBay. I hadn't shopped on their site, told everyone about my experience, and posted here and on all my other social media outlets that eBay wasn't taking care of the situation. So I Googled John Donahoe and found his e-mail address and forwarded him the message that had his name and eBay's buyer protection commitment on it -- expecting that in the best case scenario, I'd get some campy form response telling me how valuable my feedback was (why do people do that? Just proves it's not!).
eBay didn't take the easy way out. I got a phone call this morning from a great gentleman on their team who had received the e-mail directly from John Donahoe with a request to look into it. Apparently the boss takes customer service and the concerns of members quite seriously... we talked for a while about the case, the details of which are in my old blog post here, if you're curious. In the end, eBay is taking care of the loss by crediting me with eBay credit (a perfect solution, actually -- it keeps my business with them). But more importantly, it demonstrates that they are interested in taking care of me -- an individual. I appreciate that more than I can say -- and so I am recanting my blast of eBay -- and I'm telling you that this company deserves a good look -- they're doing something very, very right. :-)
During my recent case, I'm about 95% certain the fault was with the USPS -- that's an organization that never has cared about customer service at its highest levels (and I still hold out that this is true; I challenge anyone to prove otherwise!). eBay, though, rocks.
Thanks for restoring my faith!
Joe
I'm sitting on my couch in near complete disbelief. I saw a trend starting early in the 1990's (some will say earlier or later) where customer service became scarce and unimportant and the focus was on becoming bigger, better, more efficient, less caring, less individual and always -- more profitable. It was a concerning trend because people were not the focus, money, tech and growth were. It made for a great bubble and made for some quick millionaires. It was also extremely short-sighted and led immediately afterward to the natural byproduct of greed and hubris -- a fall! We've all seen the effects of that.
In any case, this is a long-winded way to say that I'm becoming a believer in customer service coming back in vogue, and some very big companies leading the charge. Take, for instance, eBay. I had written a scatching blog entry detailing an issue I had with eBay, the Post Office and a seller who didn't quite follow his own rules. I took issue mostly with eBay, because they had a program in place to provide buyer protection when customers were short-changed or didn't get what they ordered. It's a wise move on their part to have a program like that, particularly because there are some less than reputable folks selling on eBay. They also do have programs in place to eliminate that kind of chaff -- and I've always felt like doing business on eBay was pretty safe. So I was blown away when I contacted their buyer protection team and got shut down completely. Then I received an e-mail talking about how valuable this program was, which included the CEO's name. It was somewhat like throwing kerosene on a fire -- I was still pretty irritated with eBay. I hadn't shopped on their site, told everyone about my experience, and posted here and on all my other social media outlets that eBay wasn't taking care of the situation. So I Googled John Donahoe and found his e-mail address and forwarded him the message that had his name and eBay's buyer protection commitment on it -- expecting that in the best case scenario, I'd get some campy form response telling me how valuable my feedback was (why do people do that? Just proves it's not!).
eBay didn't take the easy way out. I got a phone call this morning from a great gentleman on their team who had received the e-mail directly from John Donahoe with a request to look into it. Apparently the boss takes customer service and the concerns of members quite seriously... we talked for a while about the case, the details of which are in my old blog post here, if you're curious. In the end, eBay is taking care of the loss by crediting me with eBay credit (a perfect solution, actually -- it keeps my business with them). But more importantly, it demonstrates that they are interested in taking care of me -- an individual. I appreciate that more than I can say -- and so I am recanting my blast of eBay -- and I'm telling you that this company deserves a good look -- they're doing something very, very right. :-)
During my recent case, I'm about 95% certain the fault was with the USPS -- that's an organization that never has cared about customer service at its highest levels (and I still hold out that this is true; I challenge anyone to prove otherwise!). eBay, though, rocks.
Thanks for restoring my faith!
Joe
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
We The People -- only need you for one term, thanks...
Cross posting from a comment I made on friend's Facebook wall post:
Brian's got a point - we waste a lot of services to keep stupid people alive -- unfortunately, they're probably the same stupid people who are voting the tea bag way. Ben's got a point that people don't want to spend money that they worked hard to earn on things they don't see as valuable. Government doesn't appear valuable because they suck at doing things efficiently. If we can improve their efficiency, we'd have a lot easier time to justify paying their salaries and expenses.
The problem with the tea-heads is that they think all government is evil and that the Constitution prohibits all forms of government not explicitly called out by the framers. Couple things wrong with that assertion --
1. It has nothing to do with any local, state or non-Federal government. That's up to the state Constitutions and local government bylaws and guidelines. A locality can't say it's okay to murder, but they can say "We're not going to charge you taxes to live here." They wouldn't survive, because taxes are a necessity, but they could theoretically say that.
2. The framers wrote the Constitution 224 years ago. We've made a few revisions since then, many of them valuable ones, clarifying the intent of what our society believes is right. "Giving" women the right to vote should have been in the original document, but society at the time didn't think they were competent to the task. That was obviously an error in judgement. Why would we think that other errors in their judgement didn't exist? Why do we hold this document up as infallible, when we've got clear evidence it had bugs?
3. The image that most tea-heads have of government is an "us-vs-them" mentality. Government is of the people and by the people, remember? Those idiots up there running "government?" They were working at the office down the street last week. Remember that those government incompetents in office (all public governments in the US) were elected by the people. If the people really thought they were doing the job that poorly, they could replace them, even mid-term if necessary. The problem is that we've built up this image that politiicans need to be political and need to serve more than one term. If we could get our public servants to serve us for a single term, focus all their energy on solving problems and not on getting re-elected, getting their friends elected (while in office), etc., we'd be able to really get the people who were interested in taking time to get the thing done right. Imagine, for instance, if you didn't have to worry about what you were doing to do when your term came up -- that you didn't have to spend time and effort fund-raising, smearing your opponents, etc.; that you could focus on doing the job at hand and answering only for the body of work that you put out, not the life that you lived for the 40 years before you got into office. Great examples of this: who thinks that anything Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd, Ted Stevens or Joe Biden did in their last days in office was their best work? Did they accomplish a few things? Sure. Were they fired up to get the will of the people done? Eh, not so much. They wanted to stay in power. Why would we have someone doing the same job for 51 years (Byrd) when he wasn't even able to read the legislation the last few years of his life? Why would we allow them to shape the future of our country?
It's time to get the future out of the hands of a few old grumpy men and women (Nancy Pelosi? Get outta here!) It's time to return to people who don't want to spend their lives consumed with the need to stay in power and in charge. George Washington wasn't necessarily a great man, but he had a great idea of service -- serve the Country and the greater good for a little while and get out. Abe Lincoln was nervous as hell when we got elected President -- and with good reason, as he had a pretty rough road to walk. The road right now is equally rough (albeit for different reasons) -- we need to find someone who will take on the task and then go home. I think all political office should be for a single term; there are plenty of people who are capable of running for and excuting the various political offices. For those who say there's a need for continuity -- continuing what? Bad polcy-making, bad power-grabbing, greed and other evils? Why? If we really need continuity in office, cascade the terms of related offices and have each change of office include a period of time for transition where the incumbent keeps the office and authority for the first half while training the new occupant, then switch for the other half. People do this in corporate America all the time -- CEOs (arguably much more difficult a transition than most political offices), VPs, Chair of the Board, etc.
If we want to eliminate the waste and fluff from government, we've got to stop people from focusing on the short-term -- and the only way I can see to do that is get them stop focusing on themselves, their careers and their cronies and to focus on what WE THE PEOPLE need. What say ye?
Brian's got a point - we waste a lot of services to keep stupid people alive -- unfortunately, they're probably the same stupid people who are voting the tea bag way. Ben's got a point that people don't want to spend money that they worked hard to earn on things they don't see as valuable. Government doesn't appear valuable because they suck at doing things efficiently. If we can improve their efficiency, we'd have a lot easier time to justify paying their salaries and expenses.
The problem with the tea-heads is that they think all government is evil and that the Constitution prohibits all forms of government not explicitly called out by the framers. Couple things wrong with that assertion --
1. It has nothing to do with any local, state or non-Federal government. That's up to the state Constitutions and local government bylaws and guidelines. A locality can't say it's okay to murder, but they can say "We're not going to charge you taxes to live here." They wouldn't survive, because taxes are a necessity, but they could theoretically say that.
2. The framers wrote the Constitution 224 years ago. We've made a few revisions since then, many of them valuable ones, clarifying the intent of what our society believes is right. "Giving" women the right to vote should have been in the original document, but society at the time didn't think they were competent to the task. That was obviously an error in judgement. Why would we think that other errors in their judgement didn't exist? Why do we hold this document up as infallible, when we've got clear evidence it had bugs?
3. The image that most tea-heads have of government is an "us-vs-them" mentality. Government is of the people and by the people, remember? Those idiots up there running "government?" They were working at the office down the street last week. Remember that those government incompetents in office (all public governments in the US) were elected by the people. If the people really thought they were doing the job that poorly, they could replace them, even mid-term if necessary. The problem is that we've built up this image that politiicans need to be political and need to serve more than one term. If we could get our public servants to serve us for a single term, focus all their energy on solving problems and not on getting re-elected, getting their friends elected (while in office), etc., we'd be able to really get the people who were interested in taking time to get the thing done right. Imagine, for instance, if you didn't have to worry about what you were doing to do when your term came up -- that you didn't have to spend time and effort fund-raising, smearing your opponents, etc.; that you could focus on doing the job at hand and answering only for the body of work that you put out, not the life that you lived for the 40 years before you got into office. Great examples of this: who thinks that anything Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd, Ted Stevens or Joe Biden did in their last days in office was their best work? Did they accomplish a few things? Sure. Were they fired up to get the will of the people done? Eh, not so much. They wanted to stay in power. Why would we have someone doing the same job for 51 years (Byrd) when he wasn't even able to read the legislation the last few years of his life? Why would we allow them to shape the future of our country?
It's time to get the future out of the hands of a few old grumpy men and women (Nancy Pelosi? Get outta here!) It's time to return to people who don't want to spend their lives consumed with the need to stay in power and in charge. George Washington wasn't necessarily a great man, but he had a great idea of service -- serve the Country and the greater good for a little while and get out. Abe Lincoln was nervous as hell when we got elected President -- and with good reason, as he had a pretty rough road to walk. The road right now is equally rough (albeit for different reasons) -- we need to find someone who will take on the task and then go home. I think all political office should be for a single term; there are plenty of people who are capable of running for and excuting the various political offices. For those who say there's a need for continuity -- continuing what? Bad polcy-making, bad power-grabbing, greed and other evils? Why? If we really need continuity in office, cascade the terms of related offices and have each change of office include a period of time for transition where the incumbent keeps the office and authority for the first half while training the new occupant, then switch for the other half. People do this in corporate America all the time -- CEOs (arguably much more difficult a transition than most political offices), VPs, Chair of the Board, etc.
If we want to eliminate the waste and fluff from government, we've got to stop people from focusing on the short-term -- and the only way I can see to do that is get them stop focusing on themselves, their careers and their cronies and to focus on what WE THE PEOPLE need. What say ye?
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
I was driving in Dallas a few minutes ago, trying to find a radio station to listen to. I stumbled across 90.5 KTXG. They were talking about today's vote on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and were espousing every single power phrase they could think of to incite the far-right looney bin voter to "stop this deviant behavior."
Except that their arguments and logic are all based on false statements, half-truths, fear-mongering and lies. Take, for instance:
"Homosexual behavior is unnatural and homosexuals put together parts of the human body that weren't meant to ...be combined." -- Right, because oral and anal sex aren't part of any non-homosexual relationship. What lunacy is this?
"Eliminating Don't Ask, Don't Tell is giving homosexuals special rights" -- no, moron, it's giving them equal rights. The equal right to serve OUR country and to defend our freedom, including the close-minded ignorant bevavior practices by this particular talking head (by schedule, it appears to be the brainchild of Bryan Fischer) and hundreds of others.
"Hating homosexuals isn't bigoted" -- really? From our friends at Merriam Webster: "bigot. n. a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance" So yeah, they're bigots. And anyone espousing such an obviously inaccurate statement shouldn't be permitted (by social limitation, not regulation) to speak in any public forum. Clueless in the extreme.
"This bill repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell will be a bellweather to gay rights." -- Great! The more we can focus on being good to one another and acting as Christ would instead of as these blow-hard buffoons (see: Pharisees, Saducees, other intolerant religion-selling blind men), the closer we'll get to being true followers of His.
So, to all my friends -- gay, straight, Christian, agnostic, atheist, polytheist, Wiccan, etc. -- thank you for keeping your minds open and your radio dials away from idiots like these who continue to lead some down the path of ignorance and intolerance. We pretend to have all the answers and to know all -- we don't. We're made in His image, but not with His knowledge. Omnipotence and omniscience are His alone -- judgement too.
Except that their arguments and logic are all based on false statements, half-truths, fear-mongering and lies. Take, for instance:
"Homosexual behavior is unnatural and homosexuals put together parts of the human body that weren't meant to ...be combined." -- Right, because oral and anal sex aren't part of any non-homosexual relationship. What lunacy is this?
"Eliminating Don't Ask, Don't Tell is giving homosexuals special rights" -- no, moron, it's giving them equal rights. The equal right to serve OUR country and to defend our freedom, including the close-minded ignorant bevavior practices by this particular talking head (by schedule, it appears to be the brainchild of Bryan Fischer) and hundreds of others.
"Hating homosexuals isn't bigoted" -- really? From our friends at Merriam Webster: "bigot. n. a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance" So yeah, they're bigots. And anyone espousing such an obviously inaccurate statement shouldn't be permitted (by social limitation, not regulation) to speak in any public forum. Clueless in the extreme.
"This bill repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell will be a bellweather to gay rights." -- Great! The more we can focus on being good to one another and acting as Christ would instead of as these blow-hard buffoons (see: Pharisees, Saducees, other intolerant religion-selling blind men), the closer we'll get to being true followers of His.
So, to all my friends -- gay, straight, Christian, agnostic, atheist, polytheist, Wiccan, etc. -- thank you for keeping your minds open and your radio dials away from idiots like these who continue to lead some down the path of ignorance and intolerance. We pretend to have all the answers and to know all -- we don't. We're made in His image, but not with His knowledge. Omnipotence and omniscience are His alone -- judgement too.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Policies are bad...
I've been following Seth Godin for a while. He's a smart guy, and I think his books really reach out to making the world around him a better place. He's not always right, and sometimes he reaches to make a point -- but he still makes a point.
I've been a child of the same mind and soul-crushing establishment that Godin speaks against for quite a while, but fortunately have maintained a somewhat adversarial relationship with it in that I tend not to blend in, to accept blindly or to toe the company line -- it's just not my style. The customers I work with (my customers in my mind) appreciate the candid nature I bring to the table, because they know I'm not going to blindly adhere to doctrine espoused by anyone.
But it seems that this is a growing breed of problem -- the tendency to follow blindly the rules set in front of oneself. Perhaps it's just that the economy is forcing people to "play it safe" to keep their jobs; perhaps it's just that people don't have the same interest in being customer-centric, but an interaction I had this weekend really showed me why being a "policies and procedures" organization doesn't work.
For those who know me, I drink iced tea. A lot. One might almost consider it an addition. I was at a popular theme park in the Orlando area which offers Joffrey's coffees and tea products. I had been to several of the Joffrey's stands to purchase iced tea; for some inexplicable reason, some stations had prepared iced tea, while others did not. This is a common experience for those of us not into drinking soda or coffee, so I have a backup plan -- hot tea and a cup of ice (You'd be amazed at how many people don't realize this is possible -- frightening!). All of the Joffrey's folks had been willing to sell me the hot tea and provide me with a cup of ice (cost to them: $0.25; tea, for those who are unaware, already has a very high profit margin, so they weren't losing anything on the deal) -- until I went to one particular stand. This one was in front of a "highway in the sky" mode of transportation and while my companion waited for me, I proceeded to have this dialogue with the "barista", Orladny. (Not sure of spelling on the name).
Me: I'd like a large iced tea.
O: We don't have that here.
Me: Okay, I'll take a large hot tea and a cup of ice.
O: I can't give you a cup of ice.
Me: Can I buy a cup of ice?
O: No, I can't sell you a cup of ice.
Me: Really? Every other Joffrey's I've been to in the past 3 days has been able to do this for me... (confused look on my face, but still patience in my voice)
O: I can't do that. Next customer?
Me: Can you call your manager for me?
O: She's not here right now.
Me: Can you call her so that I can speak with her, or otherwise provide me with a manner of bringing this to her attention?
O: I'm not allowed to use the cell phone while I'm working.
The conversation ended, because I was, at that point, arguing with a not all that intelligent (although quite shrewd) robot. She was parroting policies that got her out of doing additional work or providing any service beyond that which was on her "I must do" card. Unfortunately, the type of rule-based organizations we are creating where people are replaceable cogs is leading directly to this type of interaction more and more frequently (online chats with "customer service", script-based tech support, etc.) We are commiditizing people to the point where we are eliminating the need for them entirely; why should this store have even had employees? Why not just a machine with push-buttons? It might actually have salvaged the sale -- surely a cup of ice would have been a value-added option on a machine!
In the end, I reported her name to the theme park management, and while I expect that they'll make a reasonable effort to follow it up with the Joffrey's folks, I don't expect anything will come from it, because she was "just doing her job" after all -- she didn't break any rules, she followed the company's policies (no freebies, no giveaways, no sales of items that aren't on the menu) blindly and to the letter -- but without any thought to what that might mean to a customer. Are you doing the same thing in your organization?
I'd bet you are...
I've been a child of the same mind and soul-crushing establishment that Godin speaks against for quite a while, but fortunately have maintained a somewhat adversarial relationship with it in that I tend not to blend in, to accept blindly or to toe the company line -- it's just not my style. The customers I work with (my customers in my mind) appreciate the candid nature I bring to the table, because they know I'm not going to blindly adhere to doctrine espoused by anyone.
But it seems that this is a growing breed of problem -- the tendency to follow blindly the rules set in front of oneself. Perhaps it's just that the economy is forcing people to "play it safe" to keep their jobs; perhaps it's just that people don't have the same interest in being customer-centric, but an interaction I had this weekend really showed me why being a "policies and procedures" organization doesn't work.
For those who know me, I drink iced tea. A lot. One might almost consider it an addition. I was at a popular theme park in the Orlando area which offers Joffrey's coffees and tea products. I had been to several of the Joffrey's stands to purchase iced tea; for some inexplicable reason, some stations had prepared iced tea, while others did not. This is a common experience for those of us not into drinking soda or coffee, so I have a backup plan -- hot tea and a cup of ice (You'd be amazed at how many people don't realize this is possible -- frightening!). All of the Joffrey's folks had been willing to sell me the hot tea and provide me with a cup of ice (cost to them: $0.25; tea, for those who are unaware, already has a very high profit margin, so they weren't losing anything on the deal) -- until I went to one particular stand. This one was in front of a "highway in the sky" mode of transportation and while my companion waited for me, I proceeded to have this dialogue with the "barista", Orladny. (Not sure of spelling on the name).
Me: I'd like a large iced tea.
O: We don't have that here.
Me: Okay, I'll take a large hot tea and a cup of ice.
O: I can't give you a cup of ice.
Me: Can I buy a cup of ice?
O: No, I can't sell you a cup of ice.
Me: Really? Every other Joffrey's I've been to in the past 3 days has been able to do this for me... (confused look on my face, but still patience in my voice)
O: I can't do that. Next customer?
Me: Can you call your manager for me?
O: She's not here right now.
Me: Can you call her so that I can speak with her, or otherwise provide me with a manner of bringing this to her attention?
O: I'm not allowed to use the cell phone while I'm working.
The conversation ended, because I was, at that point, arguing with a not all that intelligent (although quite shrewd) robot. She was parroting policies that got her out of doing additional work or providing any service beyond that which was on her "I must do" card. Unfortunately, the type of rule-based organizations we are creating where people are replaceable cogs is leading directly to this type of interaction more and more frequently (online chats with "customer service", script-based tech support, etc.) We are commiditizing people to the point where we are eliminating the need for them entirely; why should this store have even had employees? Why not just a machine with push-buttons? It might actually have salvaged the sale -- surely a cup of ice would have been a value-added option on a machine!
In the end, I reported her name to the theme park management, and while I expect that they'll make a reasonable effort to follow it up with the Joffrey's folks, I don't expect anything will come from it, because she was "just doing her job" after all -- she didn't break any rules, she followed the company's policies (no freebies, no giveaways, no sales of items that aren't on the menu) blindly and to the letter -- but without any thought to what that might mean to a customer. Are you doing the same thing in your organization?
I'd bet you are...
Friday, May 14, 2010
eBay Customer Service commitment -- bogus!
I try not to allow my personal issues to creep into my blogging -- I try to keep this out of being a bitchfest about anyone or anything in particular (myself included).
That said, I'm making an exception today to call out eBay for having shoddy customer service and their false commitment to Buyer Protection. They started this new great program that they advertise on EVERY PAGE OF THEIR SITE where if you don't receive an item or if it is not what you wanted, they will help make it right. Sounds great, right?
Except they lie. They don't actually mean it. The cowards in their customer service department hide behind e-mail facades, refusing to speak with customers. Their "appeals" process is a single e-mail chain and then being cut off entirely. I'm pasting the reply from their "customer service agent" below (I use the title in quotes to illustrate their lack of ability to actually carry through on their intent).
The short version of the story. I bought an XM radio from a guy in North Carolina. His ad said he would ship it Priority Mail. He shipped it parcel post with delivery confirmation (cost difference? about $2!). That by itself should be enough cause for them to see there's a problem. They didn't. I digress.
I waited the 2 weeks for the package to show up. Finally, USPS updated their tracking system saying that it was out on the truck for delivery. I called the hotel to check to see if the package arrived (note: during the week, I live in a hotel in Dallas). It hadn't. Then I checked again, every day. Eventually the package got marked as "delivered" on the USPS' site (it wasn't). The hotel has scoured their mail room and back offices looking for my package. It's nowhere to be found. USPS swears they delivered it. I spoke to the mail carrier twice (directly in person). I went to the post office that said they delivered the package twice. They hace NO idea where it is. Regardless, I don't have it. I figured eBay's guarantee would help me -- that a big company who could absorb $68 of loss would do so. I was wrong.
So -- eBay, I'm calling you out. Your advertisement for Buyer Protection is pure fraud and I think you're lying to customers. What are you going to do about it?
And for all those who read this blog -- take care what you buy on eBay. Make sure not to use USPS for shipping, because their "tracking" is incompetent. If you can do business anywhere else, I'd suggest it.
eBay -- your move.
Quoted e-mail from eBay's non-customer service agent:
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dear joefox97,
Thank you for contacting eBay in regard to item #320511926105. I can
certainly appreciate how frustrating this situation may have been for
you as you have not received the item you paid for.
I have reviewed this case thoroughly and see that it was decided in
favor of your seller. I understand that you have still not received the
item, so I would like to explain our decision in further detail.
Your seller was able to provide us with a valid tracking number showing
the item was delivered to the address registered on your eBay account. I
hope you can understand why this led to our decision. As for your
appeal, I regret to inform you that we are not able to issue you a
refund because the tracking shows the item was delivered. It would be
unfair to the seller to overturn our decision when they have proof of
delivery.
Now I understand and believe that you have not received this item. It is
very possible that a mistake was made by the mail carrier. The package
may have never been delivered or could have been delivered to the wrong
address. In either scenario, I really do hope you can understand that we
have to make our decisions with the information available to us. When a
tracking number shows the item was delivered, we have to take that as
proof of delivery.
At this point, I would first recommend you contact the mail carrier used
to see if they could provide further details of the package's
whereabouts. If they are unable to provide you with further information,
you may consider asking neighbors if they received the package in error.
I realize this wasn't the answer you were looking for, but I hope I've
been able to explain things clearly and I thank you in advance for your
understanding.
This is eBay's final decision. No further contacts about this case will
be responded to. If you have any further questions about other issues
not related to this case, please click "Contact Us" at the top of any
eBay page.
Sincerely,
Jordan E
eBay Buyer Protection
Original Message Follows:
------------------------
Subject: GS=CU0779 | Appeal claim to CS, I didn't receive an item I paid
for or I received an item that is not as described
User Feedback: 35
User State: 01
Browser info:
Home > ResolutionCenter > Resolve Problem > Appeal
Contacting member: joefox97
Claim #: 5002108255
Item number: 320511926105
Transaction ID: 0
Problem reported:
Additional message: Maybe I'm confused -- the ad for eBay Buyer Protection clearly says "We'll cover your full purchase price plus original shipping if it your item doesn't arrive or it's not what you expected." -- My item hasn't arrived. What more do I need to say? No other reason was given, no detail as to WHY I won't be issued a refund.
Feel free to call the hotel and ask them about the package that didn't
arrive -- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (confidentiality). They can all tell you that I ask about my package everyday and it's not arrived. Or try talking to the post office to find out when and if it was delivered -- their delivery confirmation service is bogus at best. And then the seller DID NOT SHIP the package with the correct method -- his ad said "Priority Mail." He used Parcel Post. There is no way that I should be out $70 when I did nothing wrong. Be sure that if eBay decides not to assist that this will NOT be the final action I take.
--------------------------------------------------------------
That said, I'm making an exception today to call out eBay for having shoddy customer service and their false commitment to Buyer Protection. They started this new great program that they advertise on EVERY PAGE OF THEIR SITE where if you don't receive an item or if it is not what you wanted, they will help make it right. Sounds great, right?
Except they lie. They don't actually mean it. The cowards in their customer service department hide behind e-mail facades, refusing to speak with customers. Their "appeals" process is a single e-mail chain and then being cut off entirely. I'm pasting the reply from their "customer service agent" below (I use the title in quotes to illustrate their lack of ability to actually carry through on their intent).
The short version of the story. I bought an XM radio from a guy in North Carolina. His ad said he would ship it Priority Mail. He shipped it parcel post with delivery confirmation (cost difference? about $2!). That by itself should be enough cause for them to see there's a problem. They didn't. I digress.
I waited the 2 weeks for the package to show up. Finally, USPS updated their tracking system saying that it was out on the truck for delivery. I called the hotel to check to see if the package arrived (note: during the week, I live in a hotel in Dallas). It hadn't. Then I checked again, every day. Eventually the package got marked as "delivered" on the USPS' site (it wasn't). The hotel has scoured their mail room and back offices looking for my package. It's nowhere to be found. USPS swears they delivered it. I spoke to the mail carrier twice (directly in person). I went to the post office that said they delivered the package twice. They hace NO idea where it is. Regardless, I don't have it. I figured eBay's guarantee would help me -- that a big company who could absorb $68 of loss would do so. I was wrong.
So -- eBay, I'm calling you out. Your advertisement for Buyer Protection is pure fraud and I think you're lying to customers. What are you going to do about it?
And for all those who read this blog -- take care what you buy on eBay. Make sure not to use USPS for shipping, because their "tracking" is incompetent. If you can do business anywhere else, I'd suggest it.
eBay -- your move.
Quoted e-mail from eBay's non-customer service agent:
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dear joefox97,
Thank you for contacting eBay in regard to item #320511926105. I can
certainly appreciate how frustrating this situation may have been for
you as you have not received the item you paid for.
I have reviewed this case thoroughly and see that it was decided in
favor of your seller. I understand that you have still not received the
item, so I would like to explain our decision in further detail.
Your seller was able to provide us with a valid tracking number showing
the item was delivered to the address registered on your eBay account. I
hope you can understand why this led to our decision. As for your
appeal, I regret to inform you that we are not able to issue you a
refund because the tracking shows the item was delivered. It would be
unfair to the seller to overturn our decision when they have proof of
delivery.
Now I understand and believe that you have not received this item. It is
very possible that a mistake was made by the mail carrier. The package
may have never been delivered or could have been delivered to the wrong
address. In either scenario, I really do hope you can understand that we
have to make our decisions with the information available to us. When a
tracking number shows the item was delivered, we have to take that as
proof of delivery.
At this point, I would first recommend you contact the mail carrier used
to see if they could provide further details of the package's
whereabouts. If they are unable to provide you with further information,
you may consider asking neighbors if they received the package in error.
I realize this wasn't the answer you were looking for, but I hope I've
been able to explain things clearly and I thank you in advance for your
understanding.
This is eBay's final decision. No further contacts about this case will
be responded to. If you have any further questions about other issues
not related to this case, please click "Contact Us" at the top of any
eBay page.
Sincerely,
Jordan E
eBay Buyer Protection
Original Message Follows:
------------------------
Subject: GS=CU0779 | Appeal claim to CS, I didn't receive an item I paid
for or I received an item that is not as described
User Feedback: 35
User State: 01
Browser info:
Home > ResolutionCenter > Resolve Problem > Appeal
Contacting member: joefox97
Claim #: 5002108255
Item number: 320511926105
Transaction ID: 0
Problem reported:
Additional message: Maybe I'm confused -- the ad for eBay Buyer Protection clearly says "We'll cover your full purchase price plus original shipping if it your item doesn't arrive or it's not what you expected." -- My item hasn't arrived. What more do I need to say? No other reason was given, no detail as to WHY I won't be issued a refund.
Feel free to call the hotel and ask them about the package that didn't
arrive -- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (confidentiality). They can all tell you that I ask about my package everyday and it's not arrived. Or try talking to the post office to find out when and if it was delivered -- their delivery confirmation service is bogus at best. And then the seller DID NOT SHIP the package with the correct method -- his ad said "Priority Mail." He used Parcel Post. There is no way that I should be out $70 when I did nothing wrong. Be sure that if eBay decides not to assist that this will NOT be the final action I take.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
