Tag Archives: customer service

Analyzing the Customer Experience: Use Tools to Get It…

Right or Wrong?

Two of today’s hottest company interest and investment areas are the Customer Experience and Analytics. The tough economic climate and hard lessons learned as companies stem customer defections and struggle to win new ones has resulted in the growth of senior level appointments with “Customer Experience” in the job title. If companies now care more about their customers, this is truly a great thing. But it indicates that customers were a low priority were when markets were booming.

The increased availability of customer experience technology tools is not the answer because these don’t tell what really happened – just where to look. When great tools are put into the hands of the inexperienced the results are at best mediocre and, at worst, misleading.

Customers have always mattered, but many senior managers didn’t notice as they enjoyed the go for growth and cost cutting  bare-knuckle ride of the boom (or bust) years. Many companies herded customers into a one-size-fits-all process that satisfied the corporation’s needs and made little effort to address the customer’s, while few developed a close-but-respectful relationship with customers. They relied on brand strength, customer loyalty and consumer tolerance of “not quite right” as they pressed ahead, urgently feeding their own beast. Examples are plentiful as companies – utilities, banks, credit cards, airlines, government departments, TV, broadband, mobile phones and many other sectors and segments – systematically mis-sold, ignored, denied, and misrepresented to build their business, grow revenue, and hold on to the customer money they had received.

What happened next is that the economy crashed and they were caught out. Customers cut hard to make ends meet and decided that what companies provided wasn’t valuable enough. Or they fell out of love with the hype and dished a dose of reality. Or, as happened in the UK and Europe, regulators finally stopped the abuse and ordered companies to make it right with customers.

2013ter_industries1

Temkin Experience Ratings 2013

If we look at the current experience of customers in traditional high volume, low ticket price sectors, grocers, fast food chains, parcel delivery networks and retailers that have maintained a good reputation with their customers, and contrast it with the ones hit hardest during recession. As the image (right) shows, these sectors outperforms others

Today, Customer Experience managers are busy understanding what customers face when they interface with the company, and are rebuilding the business from the outside-in to simplify life for consumers and not the company. Their success is winning the affection customers who feel they are being treated fairly, and they will remain loyal for longer, and spend more of their money, and call customer service fewer times, and become (therefore) cheaper customers to support.

During the ’90s quality systems, such as ISO9001, were gaining attention. Companies believed that quality made the difference that customers would pay more for. Such systems achieved this for only a short time, but have succeeded and become integrated into businesses because they helped drive out wasted effort and materials, and enabled companies to deliver a better quality product or service for equal or lower cost.

Back to the customer experience, the tools used to boil the ocean of customer interaction data helps by identifying what customers are interested in, such as understanding their phone bill, or checking the status of their laptop repair, but it doesn’t analyse anything. It simply reports on what it sees or hears. Analysis comes through running an expert human eye over the interactions to understand what lies behind it, and to identify those improvements that remove the need for the customer to call without making their life more complicated.

Today’s Call to Action is to engineer processes, products and services with the Customer Experience in mind – as successful companies typically do already.

Show Me You Care…I’ll Heal Faster

As I drove in my car the other day I heard a story about the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) that made me wonder about the state of the world. Two senior nurses, and by senior I mean really senior – at the very top, are kicking off an initiative to introduce compassionate care into today’s health service. Nursing is often referred to as the “caring profession”. So why, if not to heal the sick and make people feel well, do people become nurses? Perhaps because it’s a job, and brings in money? I don’t think the answer is quite as simple as this, but there is an underlying problem that affects all professions, not just the “caring” one, and is an indictment of the society we live in.

These are pretty ungrateful times. Trust, confidence, hope have become tainted by inappropriate litigious, performance and cost constraint behaviours. The NHS in the UK, just like teaching, policing and other public sector roles, and private sector ones too, suffers from a breakdown in common courtesy and caring.

I see a triangle between employee, customer (patient, user etc) and the company. Communication is key, of course, but also courtesy (which costs nothing) and care (which costs a little).

Let’s go back to the NHS. Imagine a huge organisation where well people are the product, hospitals are the factory, and nurses are some of the factory workers. Unwell people are fed in at one end and, in theory, healed people come out of the other. But there’s a twist. Simply pushing everyone along the production line doesn’t produce perfect results because everyone is individual. Some of their needs are locked away inside of them and not written down on the patient’s record. So a nurse plays a vital role in the well-being of the patient, not just by administering the drugs and performing other duties, but by caring for the patient. Not just following procedure but by adding a personal element, going the extra step.

Now, say you are a nurse and prepared to care more, but two other elements come into play. The patient is rude and demanding, and your boss expects that you walk faster between tasks, follow the procedure, don’t challenge the way things are done, and move on to the next task. There’s not much incentive to care, is there?

We can apply this to every single aspect of life. I spoke to my neighbour recently who is in the police force. As we talked we got onto the subject of courtesy and the way that the public treats policemen and women, which can be pretty appalling. I pointed out that police can come across as forceful (which may be a necessary attribute) and belligerent, and that this doesn’t get any conversation off to a good start. We agreed that communication, courtesy and caring works both ways.

The industrial revolution gave us low cost, mass produced products available to the wider population. Technology has enabled us to communicate more quickly and to operate more efficiently. Analytics means we can understand more about what is going on so that change can be effected. But people are not machines without feelings, needs and wants. The state (or corporation) cannot provide everything. We need to maintain a healthy human element.

I applaud bringing compassionate care back into nursing but am saddened that this is necessary. The same applies to every role, even customer service delivered from contact centres. If people are encouraged to care. If customers didn’t feel the need to bully their way to get attention. If managers lead by example and not just by numbers. People, problems, things would be better very soon and, I think, the cost of everything would come down.

Has anyone created a formula that looks at the how the cost of providing a service is affected by clear communication, caring properly, and being courteous?

Three Reasons Why Hall of Fame Status Matters to Technology Company Customers

The 2012 MSN Customer Service Hall of Fame was recently announced and I was glad to see a few technology players in the top 10 or 15 companies.

MSN 2012 Hall of Fame Leaders Table

Looking at the top performing companies I realise that I know a few of them, either as a customer or through business. Without going into unnecessary, but potentially interesting, details there are some common traits irrespective of industry. They each:

  1. Satisfy a need and meet expectation
  2. Make it easy for me to find what I need when I need to look
  3. Humanise the interaction when I do have to make contact

Satisfy the need/Meet the expectation

 It seems strange that so many products and services are promoted as one thing but turn out to be another. This may be the result of overenthusiastic marketing, or Sales overselling, or the customer not finding it easy to understand what it does and doesn’t really do. In any case, products and services designed with the customer’s need in mind, and supported appropriately are bound to stand out from the crowd. When it comes to customer service, this is particularly important. When I read product reviews online, a one or two star rating doesn’t really put me off buying the product because the accompanying comments normally tell me more about the buyer than about the selling company or the product.

The comments that do make me reflect are the ones that identify what isn’t included, or what worked with difficulty. This is because I suspect I may have a hard time getting what I need from the product or service. So, sell me what I need and not what you have available and I will trust you again in the future.

Make it easy

Customers are generally realistic, but not always. So when things don’t go as expected, the company that anticipated I might get in touch and made answers easy to find and use online will gain my consumer appreciation. Online self-help tools are a great opportunity to validate that I do have a genuine problem, not an imagined and/or easily addressed one. But the knowledge-base content written by an engineer, in a technical language that I don’t understand, and clearly not with me (ordinary person) in mind, is an irritant and not a resource. So, instead of just ticking boxes by having the tools and content there, technology companies need to make their investment real by continually testing and improving usability.  

Humanise the interaction

I dread calling technical support helplines. I fear being stepped through the standard 42 step script that identifies that I have a problem. I know I have a problem, that’s why I called. If I have come from a diagnostic tool online, and a knowledge-base that did not help me, the last thing I want when I call or email or chat, is the human version of the same tools. Naturally, there are steps to be covered but agents must be empowered to judge the competence of the caller, asking a few validation questions before deciding how best to achieve resolution of the issue. Make me feel like a person, with ability but lacking knowledge, and I will again trust you in the future.

When looked at through the customer’s eyes I don’t think any of this is unreasonable. Through the customer service department’s eyes it probably spells “cost”, or “dissatisfaction”. I don’t think either is true. People are not standard and shouldn’t be treated as such. Professional customer service isn’t about the company process, but is about serving customers. Hall of Fame top performers know and get this. 

Do you agree?

SYKES Recognised by TSIA for Sales Assist

Technology Services World (TSW) continues to grow from event to event, this being testimony to its sector relevance and audience engagement. I hope that TSIA’s focus will broaden to other technology sector segments such as consumer.

SYKES’ Sales Assist was named a finalist for the Services Innovation Award on Monday, providing an opportunity to describe the product, approach and benefits to a sizeable audience. Competition was tough though, with ServiceSource named the other Services category finalist. As their submission was centred around their core service and platform I felt that they were likely to win. It’s difficult to present a process and methodology on paper and doesn’t always compare favourably with screen shots, dashboards and charts.

At the award ceremony, I sat somewhat nervously as the Innovation Awards part started and was knocked over when Sales Assist  was named as the category winner. SYKES is a people business and representing what we do on paper and in presentation slides is really hard, as it is for any contact center outsourcer, but when visitors meet with our people in-centre it all comes alive. They see for themselves the commitment and passion to deliver service to customers and with this it all makes sense.it alland is the thin line at the front of customer engagement.

Sales Assist is a great product, giving companies the method to build sales-through-support activities. So many companies seem to attempt this but fail to achieve a meaningful outcome. I believe it’s because the commitment to succeed is not full and badly prepared programs result in pilot program failure, leading to agents being unenthusiastic and customers disaffected.

Expo Theater Poll Result

TSW Expo Theater Poll result

I presented Sales Assist once again during the lunchtime session on Tuesday when we did a deeper dive into the five components. At the end I ran a poll to identify which components, in light of what we discussed, delegates felt failed their company’s efforts. The outcome was that 50% or more felt that four of the five (Hiring, Training, Management and Incentives) were major contributors to failure. A little way behind was Measurement with only one-third of participants identifying this. This isn’t a surprising outcome given the amount of measuring that takes place in a typical customer support program. I think Sales Assist can help companies perform better and create or improve a revenue stream.

I’ll be presenting Sales Assist again on Thursday with TSIA’s John Ragsdale. Please join us if you can.

3 Steps to Successful Vendor Management

I don’t manage vendors much these days but I know a lot of people who manage client accounts. On what makes for a successful client/vendor relationship (seen from the vendor side), they are unanimous on the following three things:

  1. Keep focussed, make things simple – big organisations are complicated and when internal conflict spills over to the vendor their desire to satisfy amplifies the conflict, making vendor success virtually impossible to achieve. So, simplify without dumbing down, prioritise – be reasonable (but ambitious) and don’t boil the ocean, stretch is good – but don’t break.
  2. Communication – not the contracted, structured, reporting stuff. The sharing type of communication. Tell your vendor what’s going on in the company; how the business is being affected by economic conditions, or competition; changes in management and corporate style; where the business is headed, and how things may shape up in the future. Naturally, you can’t share confidential information but you can speak with a trusted partner, can’t you?
  3. Share something of yourself – what’s your own goal? What are your interests and aspirations? Contracts and statements of work, though very necessary, are like a wall. If the parties stand either side then sharing is like lobbing bricks (or worse) over the top. But if you can open a door and share something then opportunities open up.

It’s in your vendor’s interest to do well for you. Turning in a green scorecard isn’t really it – that’s contract. A good vendor will go beyond the scorecard to find the other stuff that makes you, the vendor manager, shine. There’s nothing dishonest or immoral about this – a good working relationship with trust and understanding works for both parties and incorporates honesty and integrity. I’m not promoting under-the-counter payments or foreign holidays. There’s no place for that today and no need for it.

You’ve probably heard the saying “people buy from people”. I like this phrase because the four words contain so much. The key is relationship. This is supported by the pillars of understanding, trust, confidence and integrity. These stand on the foundation of “people serving people”Relationship Pillars Foundation

TowerGroup Conference – progress in a conservative world?

Banks don’t fare well in the Temkin Group’s recent UK customer experience survey. None are placed in the top 10 and only one makes it into the top 20. In fact, banks haven’t fared well for a while with anyone, being blamed for the last 4+ years crisis around the world and are the kicking boys for every aspect of corporate and personal greed. The media loves having such an easy target to point the public’s attention to.

I attended last week’s London TowerGroup conference (February 8 & 9). This was my first exposure to a banking event. I noticed conflict.

On the one hand, banking is, by breeding, a very conservative sector with structures and processes that remain largely unchanged for decades – perhaps even hundreds of years. Banks, card issuers, and the like, handle your money on your behalf. They bear little or no risk and you pay for their services either through fees (whether you realise it or not) or by allowing them to use your money but not pass on to you the full benefit. It’s quite simple really.

On the other hand, the world is moving much faster than they are. Technology enables instant, long distance, wireless, secure communication and transaction. Bank customers are pretty savvy and aspire to do lots of cool stuff using their mobile phone, mobile internet etc. But few banks are ready yet. Some are progressive, relatively speaking, but trail behind retailers and grocers (who, incidentally, dominate the Temkin rankings table).

Let’s briefly compare the banking and retail/grocery sectors

  • Banking: slow, steady, careful (?), big salaries/bonuses, not trusted/liked by customers, big profits, rarely go out of business (and when they head that way are often bailed out by government)
  • Retail: quick, dynamic, progressive, average salaries/bonuses, lots of loyal customers, low margins, go out of business or are taken over by competitors when they get it wrong

Why is this? What do banks need to do to be loved? Clearly, they need to change. TowerGroup analysts gave superb presentations about trends and the like in the industry but I wonder if focus within the sector is entirely healthy. Comparison with the outside world comes in two flavours:

  1. What are other businesses doing?
  2. What do customers want?

The best banks are showing a more retail/grocer-like face to the customer, and are making better progress as a result. Take a look at the efforts of Co-Operative Bank (#15 in the UK Temkin rankings) and First Direct (a very well regarded UK internet bank). Customers favour them. They clearly didn’t do what the others are doing but have made a difference that customers like.

“We listened to you and…” is quoted a lot by institutions. I say, thanks for the apps, and Saturday opening hours, and clear English T & Cs. But what took you so long? Customers have enjoyed internet shopping and communities, 24×7 opening hours and simple, honest words from retailers for years. Are banks catching up quickly or doing this grudgingly?

My closing comment – I joined one session that looked at Retail Banking in 2020. This was largely a focus on technology-enabled possibilities. Technology is exciting because of what it enables. I know because I provide insight and comment on the sector for my colleagues at SYKES. But I heard no prediction of changing attitudes and practices in the banking sector. This is troubling because without this banks will continue to be trundling behemoths, unloved and untrusted, and playing catchup at the customer’s expense.

PS – I met some really nice, super people and acknowledge their conversations and thoughts

PPS – what do you think?

Technical Support – the Onshore, Nearshore, Offshore Debate

The move offshore to India and other low-cost countries started away back in the late nineties/early 2000’s and heralded an exciting downward shift in the cost of providing support to customers. But has it helped businesses, or hindered them?

For some, it was a brave step – offering 40-60% lower costs, graduate calibre staff, and an unimaginable number of native English-speakers willing to work in a contact centre. For others it turned out to be a step too far – regulatory issues, cultural conflict, and adverse customer feedback. Let’s examine what happened.

  1. There were evidently some questions unasked, or long-term thinking left for later. What happens as demand grows? As competition increased?
  2. Customers began to complain. Strong dialect was typically cited, however, this masked poor business processes, little customer empathy, cultural misalignment and many other fundamental things.
  3. Companies found it very hard to manage remote operations because of legal, commercial and cultural differences.
  4. Having gone straight to the lowest English-speaking labour markets, the evolution of support becomes less clear with many companies examining even lower-cost markets where English is an outcome of the education system rather than culture.
  5. And what about other languages? For some, good shoring options exist – Spanish and French, for example. For others, the options are more difficult to justify.
    Labour Market Forces
    Labour Market Forces

It’s not exactly rocket science to state that you can attract top talent when you offer relatively high salaries and a career in a limited demand market. But when demand grows, economic forces drive higher salaries for the same/similar talent or requires compromise in moving down the pyramid – accepting lower skilled, but more readily available people. This applies to onshore, nearshore (not so far to travel) or offshore locations.

Fast forward to today. Most shoring options are now stable and plentiful. Many of the companies that went offshore have closed or sold their own centres and outsourced customer service and technical support. Why? The business benefitted from outsourcers better placed to manage the workforce, willing to meet service levels and able to cope with rapidly changing local labour market conditions. For technology companies, outsourcing customer contact management became as natural as subcontracting parts production and product assembly. The outsourcer focusses on satisfying one of many business needs.

But there are other factors to consider. Today’s technology consumer doesn’t merit a one-size-fits-all approach to support. Low cost consumer electronics can’t sustain a high cost support model, so self-help, community forums and offshore resource options make sense. High value customers merit more attention because they are repeat buyers, spending more in each transaction. This doesn’t mean that offshore/nearshore = low skills and onshore = high skills. It does mean that what your business needs, and what your customers want, are unique to you.

Few companies have the resources to finely model their customer service operation themselves. At the simple end of the spectrum, it’s about the cost of skills and required effort to manage and maintain. At the other end, many factors such as business growth, economic cycles, talent availabilility, staff development, attrition, technical skills, languages, multiple communication channels, customer sentiment/opinion, and added-value make the model very complex. Multiple shoring options are a few of the gauges and dials an outsourcer has to finely tune to company current and future needs. Even technical support is no longer just that, but an opportunity to establish rapport with the customer to win more or repeat business in a tough market.

And then there’s the political pressure. President Obama’s speech last week referenced the repatriating of US jobs from other regions through tax incentives. Will these be enough to make a difference? Or is the tide turning for technology companies anyway, because of customer preference/pressure?

Where are you in the cycle? Considering offshore or nearshore? Been offshore and considering moving closer to the demand?

Social Customer Service | Need to Scale the Team or Not?

Most company social media (SM) activity is promotional – brand, profile, product, offer. So the majority of available help is focussed in this area. Emerging, though, is the need to engagement with customers in a service and support, not promotional, environment.

In many cases, marketing departments are handling customer enquiries like a discussion, which isn’t good. Or are ignoring them, which is really bad. So, companies need to be customer service consistent at least, and this will soon be joined by the need to scale engagement team because social customer service will grow over time and as channels mature and companies succeed.

Therefore social customer service and support is not the domain of the creative team. If your service/support need is small now, ask yourself the question “will it remain small?”

Answer “yes”, and your design/creative/marketing department, with input from customer service will be fine. Answer “maybe not” or “no” and you could soon find yourself with a collection of small, disparate teams, dedicated by country, language or product line.

Is this a bad thing? For many companies it is because poorly regulated, inconsistent interactions is the least effective way to support customers and, in social channels, carries real risk of embarrassment or adverse (public) reaction.

How can consistency and scale be achieved? By design and deployment of the social service engagement to complement the creative and promotional aspects. This is not a creative agency/department core strength and is, perhaps, the unglamorous face of social media activity.

What’s needed for social programs that are established and need to be brought into alignment, or will scale as milestones are passed, is an approach and structure to provide a platform for the aims and culture of an enterprise social program. I’ve created an image of it here:

Social Team Infographic
Key Features for Establishing and Scaling the Social Support Team

The corporate steps every company should follow are on left side of the image. I may have over-simplified as it’s not my area of expertise, however, companies such as AntsEyeView, Radian6, Lithium and others are well positioned to advise or provide.

On the right I’ve summarized the key team elements. Excluded from this are corporate community management and creative resources because these sit on the left, but day-to-day community management and customer engagement is covered.

Many organisations manage with part-time and small teams working within or side by side with creative and customer service teams but, once your team grows beyond a single location or skillset, or gets to 10 or more people, a lot more structure and focus is needed maintain control and focus on what you doing. This doesn’t diminish the ability to adapt and flex to meet changing needs but does, however, require attention and process to prevent things becoming unwieldy and deliver consistently.

With scale comes the need to specialise. “Super-moderators”, natuarally skilled across the whole environment, are already becoming difficult or expensive to hire. Finding individuals with potential, and developing them through coaching is the way to increase capacity and deliver consistent outcomes.

More to come on related topics in the near future.

Industry certification in Social Media? Not a bad idea, but not necessary in my view

Jeremiah Owyang recently posted on this topic. I agree with what he wrote, but believe that certification is needed to achieve consistency and not expert status. To explain…

Industry-level certification won’t deliver much value in my view, as each company’s need, each program, each project and each channel is different. Additionally, social customer service is not yet established or consistent enough for such certification to be meaningful. Industry certification is like trying to hit a fast-moving target at half a mile with a bow and arrow. Fun setting up but hitting the mark is difficult.

He speaks of experience, which is a vital ingredient, but the demand for talent and experience could well have the same effect that the Y2K issue had on IT sector pay 11 or more years ago. Young, inexperienced people with little more knowledge than a regular IT user were paid a lot of money as companies screamed out for resources to help save them from the meltdown. The current demand is, I confess, a bit different but experience takes time and there isn’t enough time available to allow talent to mature at its own rate.

So, what’s the answer? Well, outsourcing could well be. I have a vested interest which I am happy to declare now. My employer is a contact centre outsourcer, employing around 45,000 people around the globe, and does a ton of recruitment, training and development every week.

Why is this relevant? Well, contact centre outsourcers focus on managing customer interactions and are not burdened with other company stuff such as research and development, marketing, managing channels, and fighting off the client’s competition (though the services delivered are a component in doing this). We focus on the conversation and taking it to the customer’s (and hopefully client’s) desired conclusion. To achieve this, at a cost that the client will pay and to the required standard, we have incredible resources to identify, recruit, train, develop, retain and manage the right talent. People are taken from little or no knowledge to “capable” in just a few weeks and continue to develop with regular coaching.

We do this on a huge scale for regular voice, email and chat programs, and on a smaller scale for social programs. Even though smaller, we still have more people engaged in social customer service and support than many specialist companies employ.

The result is that every client program has social-certified agents. No need to adopt someone else’s standards, or create from scratch. As every program is different, a key element is customising to satisfy the unique needs while leveraging experience from elsewhere. Success is achieved without running the risks brought about by limited capability and exposure. This way, no one goes online without achieving the agreed basic standard and what they are allowed to do is determined by their level of experience and achievement.

Why would a company develop their own program when they can leverage the experience and best practices of others? Which is better?

I’ll post again with more details on this topic over the next few days.

The impact of customer service in social media is a rounding error, Customer Response Summit 3

I attended CRS3 (Scottsdale, AZ) last month as a sponsor and speaker, and was impressed by the very open way in which delegates discussed their drive to improve their understanding of customer service in social media, and the ways they’re establishing and improving their existing activities.

For me, There were two standout presentations. I’ve added a few sentences to summarise the highpoints:

Jeff Russakow of Yahoo started proceedings. “Looking ahead,” he says, “the current is not sustainable in the future. The proliferation of devices with all the associated interoperability and configuration issues, and the much narrower margins achieved by companies, are a good indicator that the cost of supporting a customer has to change.” Clearly Jeff says this from his own perspective, however, the writing is on the wall for all businesses as consumer expectations shift and cost pressures build. So what does the future look like? Most likely customers will be given much better self-help and peer-help options such as online knowledge and community forums. Additionally, companies must do more to prevent the customer from needing help. Jeff called this “Tier -1”.

By building more features into products, companies increase their complexity. This increases the gap between what a product can do and the user’s ability. Much complexity needs to be hidden away and, as pioneered by Apple, the user interface will be simpler with individual applications designed around a task rather than a range of tasks. Similarly, the shift towards the cloud (and (applications installed there) will result in fewer installation help calls (because installation is replaced with configuration). As this type of call accounts for around 25% of help requests the impact is significant. I’m indebted to Jeff for his insights.

Carol Borghesi of Telus followed with a challenge to the claimed importance of social media, stating that “the impact of social media on customer service costs is so far a ’rounding error”. Additonally, “the future must be established by companies delivering against expectations they set with customers”.

 Carol also shared the following phrase “customer service is the drip tray of the organisation”. This resonated with me. The vast majority of customer interactions are necessitated by something that happened outside of the customer’s expectation. Whether this be a software installation that failed, or a credit card statement showing items you didn’t buy, or an abnormally high mobile telephone bill, the customer’s need to interact is not always as they wish.

Then, of course, it can get worse when the customer calls to make a change to an arrangement and has to get in touch again because the transaction was not carried out as agreed. Imagine the impact if a company always did what it said it would – the cost of customer support would reduce dramatically, customers would be happier, and margins would be healthier and customers happier.

Customer preference is important in the choice of communication channel, and this is where social media has a part to play. Before social networks, Twitter, community forums and chat came along the customer was able only to have a conversation or correspond by telephone or e-mail or in writing. The proliferation of online channels has opened up wonderful possibilities for the consumer but created a nightmare for the organisation. The best companies are those that are thoughtful about the customer’s preference and manage and meet customer expectations. These are the companies that will succeed!

There were a number of other thought-provoking what helpful presentations made. Full details will be available on the CRS three website. I met a lot of very good people this week and wish them all success on their journey in social media and improving the customer experience. The conference was held at the Western Kiel and resort and spa in Scottsdale which is a lovely location, and provided the perfect atmosphere is delegates sought to learn and contribute and improve.