These days, who isn’t looking to create efficiencies in every work process, transaction and function? When we evaluate our options to be more efficient, can we quantify the impact on the customer and the employee?
I read a good article on the Great Brook website about customer experience management, which, the author contends, is looking from the wrong angle: the experience is designed; then managed to greater effect for both customer and company.
The article cited the notorious example of the JetBlue (ex) employee who went ballistic because of a rude passenger and, while he may have 90,000 “friends” on MySpace, he doesn’t have a job. The article examines the system from two perspectives: the customer (JetBlue actually refers to its passengers as customers) and the employee. The ultimate issue is not employee engagement per se or customer loyalty; JetBlue comes up well in research into both areas. It’s about how well the process has been designed to promote more harmony and less frustration; more engagement and less bad behavior; more loyalty and less attrition (or banging of stuff into overhead bins).
The crux of the problem in so many industries is that workflow and processes are designed from the Inside-Out, and the fact that the customer is actually a key component of the process isn’t factored in. All our side of the ledger shows is how much time and money saved and wasteful steps eliminated -- for us.
The burden of negotiating our unhelpful web sites, hellacious voice mail systems and confusing online storefronts calls falls on the customer; but when is the ensuing frustration accounted for as a cost? And, who measures the impact of (dis)engagement when customers’ anger and frustration are taken out on the front line employee?
When customer feedback says “I want self-service on my schedule, preferably online”, this is not a license to implement any sub-par system on the basis that because the customer has indicated a general preference, anything we implement is bound to satisfy needs.
I’ve spent a lot of time in business process redesign and there is no doubt that there is a smart way to do it and a really stupid way. Let’s outline the smart way and you’ll figure out what the stupid way looks like. When mapping a process that in any way involves customers:
- How are your customer interfaces designed? Inside-Out or Outside-In?
- What tasks are you asking customers to perform instead of you?
- Are you making the process efficient for the customer or just you?
- Are you saving yourself time at the expense of the customers’ time?
- Have you asked your employees which of your processes cause the most frustration for customers?
- Have you asked your customers the same question?
- Have you quantified the costs and benefits of your processes on your customers or you only?
Part of the employee engagement/customer commitment linkage is having processes that respect both parties who are expected to use them. Bringing a customer to the point of anger with an employee means that everyone loses.
Are you designing your processes Outside-in or Inside-out? Do you measure your own benefits from efficiency or do you think about the cost to your customers?
Posts
Barbara:
ReplyDeleteI thought about that JetBlue incident a lot. Just like you I was trying to dissect it from a customer and employee perspective. And you are right, there is a break down in process when the customer and employee are both so frustrated one winds up going to jail.
I wish more company Execs would be on the receiving on of the "customer service" experience. (Undercover boss style, but without the cameras and edits).
If they spent a day like I did yesterday with Comcast, they would definitely do some Outside-In redesigning!
Great read as usual-
Cathy
Thanks, Cathy, for your perspective. Companies spend so much money and resources at the front end to attract a customer and then destroy every dollar of investment by thinking only of their own bottom line savings and not the cost to the customer with really stupid processes.
ReplyDeleteAs the Leading Engaged Companies model suggests, processes facilitate employee engagement and customer retention. If they aren't doing their job, processes have to be checked out for more than operational savings and audited to ensure they are adding value to the experiences of both employees and customers
I think we have all had similar experiences where systems are set up for the convenience of the company and not the customer. A few come to mind. Paperwork at a doctor's office where you are asked if anything has changed with insurance company, address, etc. yet when you say no they still ask you to fill out new paperwork "Because we do it every six months". Or a phone system that offers you 7 options of what you can do. All done in the name of customer service. However, you often wonder what their definition of "customer" is.
ReplyDeleteGood post. I like your stuff... always very thoughtful. We can learn alot from reading you.
Thanks, Mike. I am most frustrated by those companies who, in the immortal words of Tonto, "speak with forked tongue"! Touting customer experience management and customer focus but then don't take these concepts into and around the company. And don't link bad processes to employee engagement. When an HR Director has an "employee relations" issue, how often is a root cause analysis done of the problem to find out what really ticked off that individual.
ReplyDeleteI'd just love to dismantle a few silos!