PPM and customer service

Last week I had an interesting interaction with Virgin Australia. I wanted to make significant changes to a booking and I understood that there would be a fee involved. To check on the process I phoned Virgin and received clear instructions on how it could be done on line and what the fee would be. I then went on line to make the changes but, no matter what I tried, something wouldn't work. I again phoned Virgin, spoke to a different person, and was then told that the changes could only be made over the phone and that, because I was doing it by phone, there would be further charges! Even though Virgin Australia's policies may have no such intention, the person with whom I spoke left me with the impression that some form of price gouging may be involved. When I asked to speak to a supervisor or manager I was told that this wasn't possible and that, even if I did speak with one, I would be given the same message!! So much for Virgin Australia Service!

Two phone calls. Two different "service" people. Two totally different messages. I find it very easy to forget the first, helpful person and very easy to remember the second, very unhelpful and uncooperative person. Unfortunately for Virgin, as is usually the case in customer service interactions, it is the negative experience which tends to dominate.

I have written quite a few blogs on customer service (they're all available below). It is a sad fact that today, with organisations' emphasis on short term to medium term results and the use of outsourced and casual staff, cultures of relatively short term expediency seem to be replacing service and commitment. As I have said before about PPM (Piss Poor Management), it starts at the top by actions of commission and/or omission. In the case of my recent experience with Virgin Australia I suspect the "omission" aspect applies as contradictory messages (both direct and implied) were given.

Today's business environment is increasingly competitive and customers are increasingly price conscious. Things like air travel that once were "special" are now a commodity. Those supplying commodities need to offer something special to set themselves apart and to encourage customer/client loyalty - and "loyalty programs" don't fit this bill. Good management and good leadership recognises this and works constantly to ensure this "something special" is always on show and applied.

"We the people" are happy to respond positively when we feel that service providers really are providing service. Don't we?

What do you think? Please make your comments below.

More about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

More signs of PPM

Bullying is only one sign of PPM (Piss Poor Management)! There are many others.

Here are some examples provided to me in the past two weeks:

• A manager who employs people on the basis of the lowest remuneration possible rather than on ability to do the job required
• A manager who refuses to confront poor performance and low quality work because he feels it is important to be "liked" by his staff
• A company where senior executives seldom visit any of the 9 sites away from Head Office and ignore immoral and possibly illegal activity by the managers in those sites - the result is apprentices not paid for overtime work and the emergence of unsafe work practices
• A company where there is a high turnover of qualified staff because they are unhappy about the high volume, low quality work practices encouraged by managers

My point is that PPM can have many faces.

Good managers ensure that everyone clearly understands performance criteria in both qualitative and quantitative terms. They also ensure that those performance standards are high enough to stretch people yet low enough to be attainable. These performance standards are then broken down into easy-to-understand results areas and performance indicators that are properly monitored. Where criteria are being met, recognition is given and where criteria are not being met, clear action is taken to get things back on track - performance standards are not allowed to slide. Good executives ensure there is appropriate oversight and governance in all areas for which they are responsible.

Its not "rocket science" - supervisory and management programs have been teaching this for at least 50 years and good managers have practiced it since time immemorial.

We need to address and eliminate PPM!

What are your experiences with PPM? I'd love to know. Please write your comments below.

More about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

Improving Decision Making

Chris Stephenson, a highly successful and well respected CEO who is now a management consultant in Sydney, has recently completed a valuable study on decision making[1].

There is plenty of material available that shows the importance of making good strategic decisions and, in retrospect, it is always easy to nominate “good” or “bad” decisions. Of course, there are also plenty of models around that can work us through a process (usually quite time intensive) designed to ensure we make the “right” decision.

But most of us don’t have the time to work through some complicated decision-making model and, even if we did have the time, the evidence shows that there is still no guarantee that we will make a “good” decision every (or even most of) the time. In fact there is data that shows only about 15% of organisations have the ability to make and implement important decisions effectively.

Stephenson interviewed CEOs and Executives in Australia about their decision making processes. His interest was to find out how we can improve the quality of decision making – in other words, rather than considering decisions that had been made and then deciding were these decisions “good” or “bad”, he wanted to find out those things surrounding the final decision being made so that the probability of a “good” decision improved.

He found that the key factors that resulted in poor quality decisions were:

• No decision-making process – Decisions are made on a case by case basis often by a small sub-group or by the CEO alone mandating a direction without any discussion.
• Lack of transparency – Excluding stakeholders from decision-making, withholding information, side-bar discussions between the CEO and individuals outside of the TMT.
• Low tolerance for diversity and alternate views – A low appreciation of the value of diversity and experience.
• Disrespect – Treating those with different views as disloyal and not team contributors.
• Data – Ignoring data when it didn’t confirm favoured outcomes. Over relying on small data samples when they supported desired outcomes. Pretending everything is OK when it’s not.
• Dominant individuals – A CEO or others dominating the discussion and chiding anyone that offers alternative inputs.
• Self interest – Allowing self interest to be the basis of decision outcomes rather than organisational best interest.
• Emotional factors – Taking decisions on gut instinct without cross-checking against the data. Not appreciating the affect of personal biases on decisions.
• Narcissism – Decisions driven by individuals with an over developed self belief and inability to comprehend other people mattering or themselves being wrong.
• Ego – Decisions driven by one person’s agenda to further themselves.

All business decisions today are made in an environment of increasing complexity, information overload, reducing lead-times, personal motives, survival and self-serving instincts, and pressure associated with meeting market expectations. What Stephenson found out was that the quality of decisions depended a lot on:

• Knowing who is making the decision and their accountability for it
• Understanding the timeframe
• A robust process
• Transparency
• Inclusiveness
• Appreciating diversity
• A sense of order
• Accurate data
• Mutual respect
• Active debate on issues with everyone involved having a say

Where this second set of factors were clear throughout the organisation – in other words, this was the organisation’s culture - the quality of decision making improved significantly.

What decision making culture exists in your business? As Stephenson shows, its not hard to make it positive.

More information about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

---

[1] Unpublished DBA thesis through Southern Cross University.

The "Pleasant Bug"

What a month!

Moving house has to be one of the most traumatic experiences! I think the stress gauge suggests that its in the top 3 or 4 stressful things a person can do. I won't argue with that!

This is our 3rd week in the new home. The dogs and the cat have settled in and yesterday I finished putting in the vegetable garden so we are looking forward to fresh, home grown vegetables during late spring and summer. Of course getting things straightened out inside the house is quite different. There are boxes that are still not unpacked and things are being constantly reorganised until we get them "just right". And there's plenty more work to be done around the garden with pruning and tidying so it looks good for summer. But we'll get there.

Today the electrician is here replacing various faulty fittings and later this week the plumber and a roofer will arrive to fix up some faults that have become apparent. My experience of trades people is generally pretty positive. Most of the ones with whom have had to deal could be described as "the salt of the earth". Today's sparky is no exception. Cheerful, highly proficient, thorough and fast. Andrew Davies certainly knows that good customer service is vital.

And I had another example of good service on Sunday when I went to Bunnings in Thornleigh. I had taken my selections to the check out and the cashier and I chatted as he processed the sale. In response to something I said he suggested that one item might not be the best for what I needed to do. He suggested a slightly different, less expensive item so I made the change. He was right. The second item was perfect whereas I would have needed to slightly modify my original choice.

People like Andrew Davies and the Bunnings cashier have an impact far beyond the immediate interaction. At a time when little things can be blown out of proportion because of the general disruption experienced, they provide a calming and positive effect. Not only do they encourage me to use them again when I need an electrician or hardware, but they also infect others with the "pleasant bug". Thank you.

Are you infecting people with the "pleasant bug"?

More information about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

Is "customer service" an oxymoron?

I have just come off the phone from talking with Optus. Here in Australia they are purported to be a communications company. Can you guess what's coming next?

You got it!

Optus suck at communicating - at least with me.

Let me bore you with the details. Recently a mobile phone was stolen and the appropriate steps were taken to notify the Police, cancel the sim card, and make an insurance claim. Today I received notification that the claim was approved and I was given a number to call in order to arrange settlement of the claim. This should be easy, I thought, and phoned them! I spent the next 30 minutes in a never ending loop that took me back to the same place 4 times. Yes, my patience wore thin and I eventually hung up.

A cup of tea later and I tried again. This time what a difference. I was fortunate to strike an agent who was different - he wanted to help. With his help I was through the system in just over 5 minutes and everything was finalised. What a pity he's possibly the only person like that at Optus! I hope they pay him more than the CEO - he deserves it.

Having just come off some pretty spectacular examples of really good customer service (see my recent blogs) I found today particularly frustrating. Big companies like Optus just don't seem to get it. They confuse "service" with telephone prompts that have rigid specifications and are often confusing in themselves.

So let me spell it out for Optus and others who are confused.

Customer service means individual attention to the needs and concerns of another individual. It involves the investment of some time by a knowledgeable person who is willing and able to listen to the needs and concerns of another person then help resolve whatever it is that needs attention. Computers can't do this. Harried, poorly trained call centre people who are under pressure to minimise the time they spend with each customer can't do this. Forcing customers into interactions with these will simply add to blood pressure levels and an increase of complaints to the appropriate authorities.

Its not rocket science.

People like me want customer service when we have a problem and we expect to receive it given the charges that are made for telephone services, banking services, government services and the like. Failure to provide the service we want and need results in blogs like this, then customer churn, then reduced profits, and so on. Its a leadership issue and, Optus, you're failing the leadership test.

Organisations like Fantastic Furniture, JaxQuickfit Tyres, and the NSW Fire Brigades get it. Why can't Optus?

What do you think?

More about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com.

Customer Service - there's more!

It was interesting to note that one of the TV Channels in Sydney ran a piece on customer service last evening. They looked at the difference between what the various major grocery retail chains promised in their advertising about service and what they actually delivered. The results were not what any of the organisations involved really wanted. The TV program seemed to imply that this was a training issue.

I have 2 daughters who supplement their university studies by working as casuals in the retail industry. They see the issue as being a little more complex - and I think they're right. They think the problem involves 3 things - application of policy, training of employees, and customer behaviour.

First, customer behaviour.

One of the things that frustrates my daughters is customers who refuse service - customers who seem to be in such a hurry that any attempt to provide information is treated with rudeness and, sometimes, offensive behaviour. Generally these seem to be the customers who want to push ahead of anyone else who may be waiting or is even being served and for whom the entire matter of a sales transaction seems to be the worst thing in the world. "Get enough of these in a shift," I was told, "and its easy to forget that you have a primary role to help the customer."

Second, training of employees.

This really is a critical matter. As a customer I am often frustrated when sales assistants seem to show no interest in what they are selling and even less interest in me. Its as though they are simply going through the motions of "customer service" without really believing in what they are doing.

The easy response to this is to say that he or she has an "attitude problem". But that simply isn't true. The person involved has a behaviour problem - they are not doing what they have been trained to do - and that is all about behaviour. The fact is that, like most other people, I'm not really concerned about what a salesperson thinks of me or of the goods or services they are selling. That's their business. What I am concerned about is how they relate to me - and that is behavioural. Organisations need to ensure that their employees are properly trained to deliver good customer service no matter what they may think or what they may be feeling.

Application of Policy.

This is where the role of management becomes critical. Leaders and managers have a responsibility to create an environment in which their staff can be successful. And this is the key area in which most fall down. Unless those in leadership positions model the appropriate behaviour, they cannot complain when their staff fall short of desired standards. This is where the examples I used in my earlier blog on customer service stand out. Both Trevor at Fantastic Furniture and Mark at Jaxquickfit Tyres were leaders who demonstrated the behaviour their organisations wanted in relation to customer service. Its no wonder that the people who replaced my son's bed and the technicians who worked on my car continued the practice of good customer service - they saw it in their leaders.

Another part of this application of policy is recognition of "you get what you reward". Some years ago Ken Blanchard in "The One Minute Manager" wrote "surprise someone: catch them doing something right!" Attention from a leader is a very powerful means of recognition and reward. In your organisation where do you place the most emphasis? Do you pay more attention to what person does right ..... or to what they do wrong?


You cannot affect the way a customer relates to you. But you can affect how you relate to any and every customer - and that's the key to good customer service.

More information about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

Customer Service

Quite a long time ago I listed an article on EvanCarmichael.com entitled “Cracked Eggs Don’t Hatch” in which I talked about my customer service experience with Dell computers. Over the last 3 days I have had more interesting customer service experiences about which to talk.

First:

Last Saturday my son bought a new bed from an organisation in Penrith, Sydney, named “Fantastic Furniture”. When he got it home he undid the packaging and was dismayed to find that there was evidence that the unit may have been used as a showroom display and that there had been some damage which had been badly repaired. Now had he bought this as an ex-showroom item this would not have been an issue – he would have accepted that things can get damaged in a showroom and that the reduction in price would have taken account of this. But this wasn’t bought as ex-floor stock!

My son phoned the store and spoke with Trevor, the manager. The response was immediate. There was no argument or request for additional justification. The manager accepted my son was not happy and that the item was damaged. He said the item will be replaced. Today they are delivering a new bed and taking the other one away even though they have to come over 40 km to reach our house. Now that’s customer service – “Fantastic Service from Fantastic Furniture” is how my son described it.

Second:

A few weeks ago I got new front tyres for my car from an organisation called JAXQuickfit Tyres in Thornleigh, Sydney. This morning I heard some noise from the brakes and, because I enjoy servicing my car, I decided to check the discs. On each of the front wheels, all the wheel nuts came off easily except 1 on each side – one stud snapped on each front wheel. Now I have been working on my cars for over 50 years and in that time I have undone and done up countless wheel nuts – I’ve never before had a stud snap. Today I get two – one on each wheel that had recently had a tyre replaced by JAX. I phoned them and explained the coincidence to Mark, the manager. There was no hesitation. “We’ll fix it for you,” he said. “We’ll need the car for about an hour.”

Thank you Mr JAXQuickfit Tyres in Thornleigh.

The thing that saddens me is that service such as this is, all too often, the exception rather than the rule. It shouldn't have to be that way - and it doesn't have to be.



More information about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

Third Generation Leadership = Engagement

It is interesting to note that various articles in the mass media have picked up on the issue of relationships and how they affect engagement. The most recent trigger for this has been the change of Prime Minister in Australia.

In Australia, Prime Ministers are not elected by the people. Political parties determine their leaders and, following national elections, a particular political party (or coalition of parties) is elected to govern and the leader of that party then becomes Prime Minister. As has been graphically illustrated in the Kevin Rudd situation, a failure to engage both the general populace and your party colleagues, can lead to a rapid demise.

I note that apparently some of our business leaders (particularly in the retail arena) are using various forms of subterfuge in order to catch "slackers" at work. It seems that they feel their sales figures would be improved if people worked harder and so they want to find out who is not working as hard as perhaps they could. Clearly there is an associated implication that any "slackers" so discovered will have committed a "career limiting" activity!

I suggest that a better approach might be to improve the quality of leadership.

Most people want to do a good job. That which stops them tends to be problems in the quality of leadership or in some systems issue within the organisation. Those familiar with the concepts of Total Quality and the work of Edwards Deming will understand this.

If an organisation is not meeting the performance required, the first place to look is at the leadership. If the leader is failing to engage those with whom he or she is working, performance becomes a random variable!

I'd like to know what you think about this. Please post comments below.

More information about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

Festina Lente !! (Urgent or Important?)

From my very long ago days of doing Latin at school, I seem to remember the phrase "festina lente" as meaning "hasten slowly" or "more hurry less speed". (I may, of course, be wrong in my recollection and, if I am, I'm sure someone will correct me!!)

I thought of this today because of a couple of events.

First I listened to an interview on Australia's ABC FM radio in which the person being interviewed was telling of his commitment to increasing literacy in third world countries. He explained that, now, they are opening a new library somewhere in a third world country every 4 or 5 hours. An incredible rate given that it is only about 10 years since he first became aware of the issue and committed himself to action. He said that he was an action-orientated person who looked for solutions rather than dwelling on problems. But he also pointed out that from first realising the size of the problem to actually getting things properly moving was about a year. Since then things have grown rapidly. Festina lente !

Second I was approached by someone who is trying to get a new business up and running. She is worried about the need for positive cash flow (aren't we all!!) and has been running around everywhere trying to get business. The result is that she has lost focus on what she really wants to achieve and runs the risk of failing because of confusion regarding priorities. We discussed how taking a step back and refocusing then moving forward in a planned approach would actually help her achieve desired results far more effectively than scattering her energies across a broad range of things.

Its the old question of deciding between "what is urgent" and "what is important". Too often we concentrate on "what is urgent" with the result that "what is important" never gets done and we wind up with time management problems, quality problems, staffing problems, and all the rest.

Part of creating an environment in which everyone can be successful - ie part of leadership - is recognising and applying the need for "festina lente" !

More information about Doug Long and how I may be able to help you at http://www.dglong.com/

The Killing Fields

I understand that during the Second World War there was a slogan "Loose Lips Sink Ships" which was designed to encourage everyone to be careful about disclosing information that may be of assistance to the enemy. I know that in the 1970's there was a sales training film entitled "Who Killed The Sale" which looked at things such as general chatter by employees of an organisation being overheard by potential customers to the end that an incipient sale was lost.

I thought about this the other day when I had to phone Microsoft about an issue (yes, the same Microsoft of which I spoke in an earlier blog!).

The issue was simple. An older laptop in the house had decided it wouldn't work and the system diagnostics made it clear that radical surgery was the only remedy - a reformat and reinstall of the operating system (Windows XP). Not a major issue, I thought, and one that even a person of my limited technical expertise could do.

All went well until the machine asked for the Product Key - that 25 digit arrangement that determines whether or not Santa will scratch you from his next Christmas list because you've been naughty and used non-genuine material. No problems. I was using the original disc supplied by the manufacturer (Dell) and they had attached the product key details to the base of the computer. I carefully copied the figures and then input it. Back came the message "The Product ID you entered is not valid".

After several such attempts I then took out several other copies of XP (all carefully stored in their original packages) for other computers in the house and tried their codes. Same message.

At this point decided I was obviously doing something wrong so I emailed Microsoft explaining the situation and asking for suggestions. Back came a response from their Michael Chong asking me to repeat the information I had already given and he suggested that I phone their service line. So I phoned.

Mistake.

The woman with whom I spoke (and who, I am sure, was the same woman who previously had told me I was using illegal material because "Microsoft never made an XP Office") now told me that the problem was not Microsoft's - it was Dell's and that she couldn't help me and, in addition, that I was using a non-genuine disc! Microsoft and I will, I am sure, have further discussions about this and Dell may want to have a chat with them, too!

I then phoned a local Computer Repair person. He asked 3 questions, made 1 suggestion, and the problem was resolved. I was doing something wrong. It was a simple error. In less than 5 minutes things were working and there was no charge. All done over the phone.

In thinking about this, the examples of "Loose Lips Sink Ships" and "Who Killed the Sale" came to mind. This "service" person at Microsoft has harmed her employer. She has created in me the belief that Microsoft don't give a S**##@ about their customers and she has implied that a reputable hardware manufacturer has acted improperly.

As have said before, this is a leadership issue.

There is something in the culture at Microsoft that either models the approach taken by this service person or the training that she has been given is focused on the wrong thing. There may even be a situation of cognitive dissonance in which she is told that "service" is important but other metrics by which she is assessed indicate that that she must get rid of me in X seconds so that she can deal with another person's issues. Under that scenario she is unable to listen to my issue in any other way than with the intent of moving me on as fast as possible - "packaged answers" are the only response.

It set me thinking.

What cultural issues in your organisation damage your reputation? Are there support area issues that adversely impact on how you are perceived by your customers / clients? What are you doing to check about this? What are you going to do in order to correct it?

More information about Doug Long and how I may be able to help you at http://www.dglong.com/

Its a cultural thing

A few years ago when John Corrigan, Andrew Mowat and myself first started working with schools, we thought that helping teachers understand and change their behaviour would bring about greater levels of student engagement and hence improved results for students, teachers, and the schools. Theoretically we were right - the key to increasing student engagement does lie in the attitudes and behaviours of teachers. However what we found was that unless the culture of the school was totally supportive of the new attitudes and behaviours any improvement was transitory. (More information about this is available from http://www.gr8education.com/) This lead us to the realisation that we needed to deal with leadership issues first and foremost.

My blog on Tuesday dealt with service problems and the concern that different people dealing with the same organisation can have vastly disparate experiences. I made the point that ideally every person dealing with an organisation should have a positive experience. The issue, I argued, is one of leadership.

Deming, the 'father of quality' (as some have said), made the point that only about 15% of problems are caused by special causes. He also made the point that these are the areas on which most attention is focused because we are "seen" to be doing something about the problem - that fact that it may be simply a cosmetic repair that will eventually break down doesn't really seem to faze us. Deming argued that the time, money and effort should be put into dealing with the systems causes because, although they will probably take longer to fix, the repairs will be long-lasting.

Effectively Deming argued that leaders deal with the systems causes of quality issues because they know that ultimately quality is always a cultural matter- and leaders determine culture.

There used to be a military joke that stated military personnel of a particular country had a philosophy of "ready, fire, aim" - when the defence budget is astronomical and the culture is "gung ho" then it is easy to slip into a behaviour that shoots first and asks questions afterwards. I see this today in the behaviour of many "leaders" - and it shows primarily in a predilection for immediate rather than considered action. In the area of service quality this can be seen by disciplinary action against individuals rather than correcting the culture that forces them to minimise the amount of time they spend with each person seeking help.

What is the culture like in your organisation? What systems issues need to be addressed in order to ensure all your customers/clients receive high quality help when they need it? Before singling out individuals for blame and correction, remember that when you point a finger at someone, there are more fingers pointing back at you. If its a systems or cultural issue, dealing with a special cause won't fix it.

More information about Doug Long and how I may be able to help you on http://www.dglong.com/