Dialogue on CRM, Customer Experience, and Customer-Centricity

Colleague: So much money has been spent and continues to be spent. On CRM. On CX – voice of the customer, journey mapping etc. In the name of customer-centricity – whatever that means.  Yet, there is little to show for it.

Me: Seems that way.

Colleague: Which big company, as in the kind of company that we end up consulting to / working with, has anything to show for the time-effort-money that has been spent on the whole Customer thing?

Me: I am not aware of a single one. Maybe there is big company out there that has become customer-centric as seen through the eyes of the customers. And If there is I am not aware of it. I distrust whatever the folks who go to the Customer circus (conference circuit) say about themselves. What matters is what the customers say.

Colleague: What’s your point of view on what’s going on?  You’ve always got a point of view on pretty much everything! Let’s hear it then.

Me: Have you come across a philosopher called Heidegger?  His thinking provides a good clue as to what’s going on.

Colleague: Never heard of him. What’s he got to say that’s relevant.

Me: He introduces the distinction between “in order to” and “for the sake of”. This distinction sheds light on the failure of the whole Customer thing. And what it will take to generate success.

Colleague: Explain then!

Me: Imagine a man in a workshop working on wood.  He happens to be sawing a piece of wood.  Why is sawing this piece of wood? In order to make a cabinet.  Why is he making a cabinet? In order to sell it?  Why is he looking to sell the cabinet?  In order to get money / make a living. Why do that? In order to care for / feed his family? Why do that? For the sake of his own conception of what it is to be a good father/husband.  Why does that matter to him? It just does!  Here the chain of in order to comes to an end.  There is no in order to. Showing and travelling as good father/husband is the sake of which he gets up in the morning and works/lives.

Colleague: There you go again not answering the question. What the fork has this to do with the whole Customer thing?

Me: Let me explain it another way.  Imagine that there are two spherical round hollow cylinders. The walls are quite thin, and of the same size.  It is possible to fit/slide into the other one by squeezing it as the cylinders are made of flexible material.

Colleague: OK.

Me: One is labelled “Revenue & Profits”, the other is called “Customer-Centricity”.  You are told that you need to slide one of these cylinders into/inside of the other cylinder.  Which one do you slide inside? Which one has to fit inside the other one?  Do you fit/slide the “Customer-Centricity” cylinder inside of the “Revenue & Profits” cylinder? Or do you choose to do the opposite: squeeze/fit the “Revenue & Profits” cylinder inside the “Customer-Centricity” cylinder?

Colleague: No question, the ‘Customer-Centricity” cylinder goes inside of the “Revenue & Profits” cylinder. That’s the whole purpose of CRM, Customer Experience, and Customer -Centricity – to boost revenues, increase profit margins, and so boost profits. And to keep on doing this year after year.  Isn’t it?

Me: As a philosopher I say that purpose does not inhere in the things itself. Purpose is a human construction. And as such the speaker who speaks of purpose gets to say what the purpose is. And sure, pretty much everyone that has taken on CRM, Customer Experience, and Customer-Centricity has done so for the sake of ambition/greed: for revenue growth, raising profits margins usually by cutting the costs of serving customers, and for profits and profit growth.

Colleague: What’s wrong with that!

Me: Wrong is not found in the world.  Wrong is a human construct. It’s wrong if you say it’s wrong and get enough other folks to agree with you.  I’m not saying there is something wrong with it. I am saying that when we choose one course of action over another there are always consequences.

Colleague: I think you are saying that there is little that big companies have to show for the time-money-effort they have spent on CRM, Customer Experience, and Customer-Centricity because they have been squeezing “Customer-Centricity” inside of “Revenues & Profits”.  Is that what you are saying?

Me: That is exactly what I am saying!  Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. Almost every big company has gone about it that way. The prime, unquestioned directive, is to make the numbers, and grow the numbers. The latest magical recipe is CRM, Customer Experience, or Customer-Centricity. So lets hire a bunch of consultants to fit these magical solutions into our organisation so that these solutions help us deliver on our sake of: sake of making the numbers, sake of “Revenues & Profits”. And this approach has generated that which it has generated: limited benefits, incremental improvements in cultivating genuine loyalty.

Colleague:  The alternative?  Squeezing/fitting “Revenue & Profits” inside of “Customer-Centricity”, how does that work?

Me: As members of the senior leadership team you show up & travel in a way that makes it clear to all that you, and the company, that you represent is there for the sake of enriching the lives of your chosen set of customers.

You can do that as Zappos does through it awesome customer service.  You can do it as Apple does by creating great (as in cool, high quality, unique) products for folks who are willing to pay a premium. You can do it as Amazon does – attractive prices, huge product range, ease/convenience of shopping, and next day delivery.

Amazon, in particular Jeff Bezos, sets a clear example.  You choose to be customer-centric, to build that long term customer loyalty, to play for the long term, and you take the hit to “Revenues & Profits” over the short and even medium term. And you tell your shareholders that this is what you are about.  If they don’t like it then they should sell their shares and move on to other enterprises.

Zappos is also an instructive example.  The leadership team of Zappos started out putting the “Customer Centricity” container within the “Revenues & Profits” container. At a critical point when the Zappos was on its last legs the leadership team had to make a choice: to continue providing a lousy customer experience or do the opposite.  And it looked like doing the opposite changing the operation model so that “Revenue & Profits” had to squeeze into / fit into “Customer-Centricity” would leave to ruin faster.  The choice they made? To make “Revenues & Profits” subservient to, and for the sake of “Customer-Centricity” as in delivering an awesome customer experience.  It so happened that this change worked out for Zappos. And there is no guarantee that another company in the same situation as Zappos taking the same course of action will generate the same result.  You have to be a particular kind of idiot to believe that taking the same course of action in a open/dynamic/non-linear/uncertain/unpredictable world will yield the same results as you got last time.

Colleague: But CEOs of big listed companies cannot do this. They have to make the numbers – that’s what the analysts want, that’s what the shareholders want.

Me: Which is why I say that big listed enterprises will continue to make incremental improvements at best when it comes to the customer experiences (as viewed through the eyes of the customers) and customer loyalty.  And the field for creating an awesome customer franchise belongs to outsiders – the Zappos, the Amazons, the Apple’s of the future.

 

 

Good Strategy and Effective Execution Necessarily Involves a Sound Appreciation of the Context

I find myself in the midst of an ocean of generalities: frameworks, models, recipes, formulas, 10 steps to…. Every one promising easy/quick arrival at the promised land merely by following the authors secret/revolutionary formula/recipe.

Folks even turn to me, as a subject matter expert, for advice on how to craft a customer-centric strategy, create a customer-centric culture, build meaningful engagements with customers, call forth the very best of the employees.  Sometimes, vanity get the better of me and I do offer an approach.  When reflection sets in I realise my arrogance/stupidity. Why?

Consider deeply, you may just get that the question is not how does one motivates human beings. No! The question is what motivates this flesh & blood human being right in front of me. The question is not how does one build a customer-centric culture. No! The question is how to go about shifting this particular organisation, these particular people, towards a customer-centric way of showing up and travelling. The question is not how one calls forth customer engagement. No! The question is what calls forth engagement in this particular customer.

Put differently, effective strategy, effective execution, effective change require a sound (even intuitive) grasp of the nuances of this particular person, this particular group of people, this particular culture, this particular technology.  Why?  Allowing me to illustrate through the following:

“If a house caught fire, intervention would require an understanding of the type of fire and the strategy required to extinguish it. Clearly and electrical fire cannot be doused with water, and a chemical fire will require will require a specific type of retardant.”

-Dr Eric C. Amberg, The Five Dimensions of The Human Experience

It’s even more complicated than that, the nuances are deeper. You turn up and find it’s an electrical fire. You search for water but there are no water sources nearby. Or there simply is not enough water.  Maybe it is even more complex, it is a chemical fire yet from a distance you cannot determine which chemical is involved. Or you have to persuade some person / group of people to do what they are doing AND make some chemical retardant especially for you.

You get the idea: the nuances present in the concrete, yet always absent in the abstract, have the determining influence on how things turn out. One must be sensitive to these nuances – detect them, and know how to deal with them.  This kind of understanding can only come through a certain repertoire of lived experience. In days gone by this kind of familiarity with the particular was achieve by becoming an apprentice /disciple of a master for many years.

Today we have taken the easy route. Too many folks treat the realm of human beings – a realm of contingency, of approximation, of probability – like the realm of mathematics where 2+2 always equals 4. The price to paid for taking this path is ineffectiveness.  Ask yourself what the telcos have to show for the fortunes they have invested in CRM, customer experience……

You can ask me to advise you on how to craft a strategy right for your organisation, or how to cultivate good relationships with your customers, or how to effect culture change. Please don’t expect me to provide an answer from a distance. I am not a seer nor am I a charlatan. To help you answer the question I have to get a feel for your particulars: you, the people in your organisation, it’s history, the kind of work that occurs, how folks show up and travel in your organisation, the kind of people who are your customers and how you / your products / your competitors occur to them.

I say to you, if you wish to be effective in devising strategies, influencing people, effecting change then it is necessary to give up the easy paths, the short cuts, and take the road less travelled.  To get to grips with the particulars – not just intellectually. This getting to grips must be at a deeper level – an intuitive feel for that which you are dealing with.

Why go to this effort?  Werner Erhard summed it up beautifully: “The context is decisive.”

I thank you for your listening and wish you the very best in your living. Until the next time…

 

 

 

A ‘Fresh’ Look at Customer Retention and Loyalty (Part II)

Let’s recap Part I of this conversation. The key points as I understand them are:

  • You cannot have customer loyalty without cultivating employee loyalty and investor loyalty. Why? Because they are fundamentally and inherently interconnected.  So debates about which comes first (customers, employees, investors) shows that folks lack a fundamental grasp of that which we are dealing with.
  • Customer retention-loyalty has implications that extend to every corner of the business. It is necessarily a strategic matter. As such the ownership-responsbility-accountability  belongs with CEO.  It cannot be handed off to the Marketing function (or any other function) nor given over to a Chief Customer Officer.
  • Retention is not just another metric. It is the defining metric for the whole business. Retention is used to integrate all aspects of the business into a coherent whole.

OK, now we are in a position to move forward and conclude this conversation. Allow me to set the scene by sharing this assertion with you (bolding mine):

“Stemming the customer exodus is not simply a matter of marketing; it demands a reconsideration of core strategy and operating principles.

I say that it demands a reconsideration of core strategy and operating principles in the context of a new theory of doing business.

What Theory of Business Enables Customer Retention and Loyalty?

Practice is always based on some theory of how the world works. The dominant theory that fuels just about every large business is one of profit maximisation and shareholder enrichment.  With this focus customers and employee are seen purely as means and almost never as ends in themselves.  Which is to say that they are viewed and treated as tools rather than human beings.  Human beings do not tend to be loyal to folks who treat them as tools.

If you are serious about generating sustainable improvements in customer retention and loyalty then you will need to jettison this theory and embrace a new theory of business. Why?  Lets listen – bolding mine:

The new theory sees the fundamental mission of a business not as profit, but as value creation. It sees profit as a vital consequence of value creation – a means rather than an end, a result as opposed to a purpose…

Profits alone are an unreliable measure because it is possible to raise reported short-term earnings by liquidating human capital. Pay cuts and price increases can boost earning, but they have a negative effect on employee and customer loyalty….  

…there are two kinds of profit. Call the first kind virtuous: it’s the result of creating value, sharing it, and building the assets of the business…. the other kind of profit is destructive. Destructive profit does not come from value creation and value sharing; it comes from exploiting assets, from selling off a business’s true balance sheet. This is the kind of profit that justifies terms like profiteering…..

When profit is a company’s goal and purpose, virtuous and destructive profits serve equally well. But once you see profits as a means to, and a consequence of, the sustained creation of value, then only virtuous profit will do.”

What Kind of Stand Do Those Who Excel in Customer Retention and Loyalty Take Toward People?

Which means that a customer retention and loyalty centred approach to doing business requires a particular way of seeing-treating people, and managing the business. Let’s listen – bolding mine:

“…see people as assets rather than expenses, and they expect these assets to pay returns over a period of many years. Loyalty leaders choose human assets carefully, then find ways to extend their productive lifetimes and increase their value. Indeed, loyalty leaders engineer all their business systems to make their human inventories permanent. They view asset defections as unacceptable value-destroying failures, and they work constantly to eradicate them. 

Why treat people (customers, employees, investors) in this manner? Because loyalty to count as loyalty has to be given willingly. Listen:

“You cannot control a human inventory, which of course has a mind of its own, so you must earn its loyalty. People will invest their time and money loyally if they believe that their contributions to your company will yield super returns over time. The secret is … to select these human beings carefully, then teach them to contribute and receive value from your business…”

Is Loyalty a One-Way Street?

The assumption (and practice) as I see it is that the game of loyalty is all about loyalty from customers to the company. Which is to say loyalty is a one-way street. Is this the right way to cultivate and demonstrate loyalty?  Let’s listen – bolding mine:

“The need to keep losses under control led many companies to cover the claims required by their contracts…. then refuse to renew customer policies to avoid future losses. State Farm took a radically different view. It had no intention of canceling customers it had expended so much energy and expense to acquire and maintain, most of them for many years….. Most important, disloyalty to customers would be philosophically unacceptable. Loyalty is a two-way street. Moreover, loyalty must be seen to be a two-way street. How could State Farm possibly expect its customers and agents to remain loyal if the company did not demonstrate loyalty when the chips were down.”

Why Is It The So Many Have Accomplished So Little When It Comes to Customer Retention and Loyalty?

I’ve in the customer retention and loyalty game for 15+ years. I’ve been in the arena not just a mere spectator. I have witnessed many talk fine words, I have seen many undertake all kinds of projects and programmes to increase retention/loyalty. Yet, I have seen none succeed in any meaningful-sustainable way.  Further, when I read about which companies are doing a great job in this domain it is always the same names or new entrants with new business models.

What gets in the way of existing large, publicly quoted, companies excelling at cultivating customer loyalty?  Almost every company approaches retention and loyalty tactically. So you have a bunch of business practices that drive customers to leave. Instead of changing these practices executive put in place retention teams. Let’s be clear, most organisations have merely added on retention teams and other gimmicks to their existing way of doing business. Is this enough? Let’s listen:

Building a highly loyal customer base cannot be done as an add-on. It must be integral to a company’s basis business strategy. Loyalty leaders …. are successful because they have designed their entire business system around customer loyalty…

 

Summing Up and Closing Out This Conversation

 

I have shared a particular perspective with you and I have invited you to listen to the speaking of a particular author.  How does this strike you?  Revolutionary? New? Fresh? Stale? Impractical? Nonsense?

Now is the time for me to come clean.  The perspective that I have shared with you is the perspective that I have held since my earliest days in the Customer arena. And the speaker you have been listening to is none other than Frederick F. Reichheld.  When did he speak the words that I have shared with you?  The words were put on paper and issued as a book (The Loyalty Effect) back in 1996.

Look around at what is going on and you are likely to find that customer retention and loyalty has been approached tactically. The usually result is add-on’s to the existing way of doing business. The add-on’s can take many shapes: new website, Facebook / LinkedIn presence, customer retention team, an online customer community, new CRM system…. The results?  Are they not meagre?  Which companies by taking this approach have vaulted into loyalty leaders?  I cannot think of a single one.

Why is it that those who have jumped on the Customer bandwagon have jumped on it tactically, and not strategically?  20 years ago, Frederick Reichhheld said this:

The real trouble is that many, perhaps most, executives today have adopted a paradigm which at its heart is inconsistent with loyalty-based management. Press them, and few will insist that the primary mission of their companies is to create superior value for customers and employees so investors can prosper…”

This strikes me as being the heart of the matter. Within the context of the current paradigm it is simply not possible to cultivate meaningful loyalty. So all that is left is tactics, add-on’s, poverty of increases in loyalty, more tactics….

I wish you well and thank you for your listening. Until the next time….

 

Strategy And Purpose: Is It Really What You Say It Is?

Let’s say that you want to grasp an organisation’s strategy – say customer strategy or customer experience strategy. By strategy I mean the organisation’s manner of ‘showing up and travelling’. How would you go about determining that?

Who would you go and ask? How many people would you ask? Would you seek out the Board? The CEO? The Marketing Director? The Sales Director? The Customer Services Director? The Operations Director? The Chief Customer Officer? The Chief Digital Officer?

What would you look at/for? Would you seek out and review the latest published accounts?  The strategic plan?  Mission and values statements? The brand values and guidelines? The marketing strategy? The statements that the CEO / Finance Director has made to the financial press?

You’d be wasting your time. Just like I did in my early days in consulting. Nowadays, I pay little attention to any of these aspects. What do I direct my attention towards?  That which really matters. That which truly speaks without speaking. That which does not lie. What am I pointing at?  I invite you to listen to a man that knows – really knows:

A strategy – whether in companies or in life – is created through hundreds of everyday decisions about how you spend your time, energy, and money. With every moment of your time, every decision about how you spend your time, and your money, you are making a statement about what really matters to you. You can talk all you want about having a clear strategy and purpose for your life, but ultimately this means nothing if you are not investing the resources you have in a way that is consistent with your strategy. In the end, a strategy is nothing but good intentions unless it’s effectively implemented.

How do you make sure that you are implementing the strategy you truly want to implement? Watch where your resources flow – the resource allocation process…… You might think you are a charitable person, but how often do you really give your time or money to a cause … that you care about?  If you family matters most to you, when you think about all the choices you have made with your time in a week, does your family seem to come out on top? Because if the decisions you make about where to invest your blood, sweat, and tears are not consistent with the person you aspire to be, you’ll never become that person.

– Clayton M. Christensen, How Will You Measure Your Life?

Bringing about this consistency is not easy. It is not easy at the individual level. It is not easy at the family level. It is not easy at the team level. It is not easy at the department level. It is not easy at the company level.  Which is why so few of us are in a state of integrity: between what we say, what we believe/value, and how we actually show up and operate in life.  This means that the world is for the taking by the bold: those who are investing their blood, sweat, and tears consistent with the persons/organisation they aspire to be. And a future they aspire to create.

It occurs to me that the core challenge of leadership is not that of vision creation. Nor that of communicating vision. I say it is the political challenge that goes with changing the allocation of resources – and dealing with the blowback from the folks impacted by the changes.

And finally, I dedicate this conversation to a friend. He knows who he is.  I wish him the very best with the game that he his playing this year!

What Is The Price Of Customer Loyalty And Who Pays It?

I say that there is a ‘price’ attached to everything and it is always paid. What is open to influence is ‘who’ pays the ‘price’.  The question I wish to address in this conversation is this one: what is the price of customer loyalty and who pays it?

Let’s leave aside theory for those that specialise in it: the professors, the authors, the ‘gurus’. And look it this question in the concrete – through my lived experience.  In particular, let’s look at two recent events and experiences.

Churchill: The Price of Customer Loyalty is a 70% Mark Up

Recently, I got a renewal reminder through from Churchill regarding the car insurance policy I have with this organisation. The price was was around £320. And I was assured that I was taken care of, needed to do nothing, was in safe hands and this insurance would be renewed automatically.

In the early part of my business life I got a good look inside the insurance industry. What struck me was how the folks in the insurance industry did everything in their power to not pay customer claims including legitimate claims. Where paying out could not be stopped, the focus was on delaying payment as long as possible (money in the bank earns interest for the insurance company) and making an effort to get the customer to agree to a smaller amount than the customer was due.

With this in mind, and a niggle at the back of my mind suggesting that the previous year the premium had been less than £200, I started my due diligence on the insurance comparison websites. Guess who showed up among the most competitive insurance providers? Churchill.  Guess what the premium was? £187

Let’s take a good look at this from a loyalty perspective. The price of loyalty was to be paid by me as follows: increase in premium of £133 which amounts to a markup (on the £187) of 71%.

What did Churchill offer me in return for this extra premium? Nothing. The only difference between the £187 (on website) and the £320 (renewal) was that I got less cover! The £187 premium included free car breakdown insurance, the £320 premium did not.

What did I do? I took out a new policy for £187 and then rang to cancel the renewal. How did the call-centre agent respond? She asked me to allow her to match the best quote I had got elsewhere. I told her that Churchill had already done that. When I explained that I had taken out a new policy via the website she told me that it was normal for new customers to get a better deal especially if they sign-up online.

What else did she do? She told me off. For what? For taking out a new policy and messing up the internal system. What would she have liked me to do? Ring up Churchill, ask them to match the quote, get the renewal premium amended and continue with the existing policy.  It occurs to me that Churchill is true outside-in organisation which understand the customer and focuses on the customer experience. How else does one come up with this radical approach to doing business? Joking!  And sadly, the orientation is the default one despite all the talk.

Lesson for Customers: Never trust a commercial organisation to have your interests at heart. The standard practice is to sell you what makes most revenue-profit for the organisation this year.

Lesson for Enterprises: Given the radical transparency and ease of shopping facilitated by the internet it is necessary to pay attention to your pricing policies; not all customers are lazy, ignorant, or wealthy especially in the current economic climate.

 RAC: The Price Of Customer Loyalty Is A 12% Mark Up

We received a renewal reminder from the RAC. Like Churchill, the RAC assured me that I was in safe hands, had to do nothing, the renewal would take place automatically.  Given the comprehensive cover I have (UK, Europe, Number of People, Services) the sum of £342 did not seem too much.  As I was doing the Churchill search on the net, I did the same for car breakdown cover.

I chose only to look at two organisations: RAC and the AA.  RAC turned out to be just as competitive as the AA. Given my positive experiences with both organisations, I did not mind which ended up providing the cover.  When I plugged in my cover requirements from the renewal reminder into the RAC website, I found the same cover for £322. No big difference.

Seeing myself as a Customer Experience investigator, I chose to call the RAC. I selected the ‘going elsewhere option’ on the IVR. The agent answered the call, I told him the situation. He has helpful and investigated. What renewal premium did he offer me? Better than I was looking at on the RAC website. He offered me a renewal premium of £307. I took up the offer.

So let’s do the maths. The price of customer loyalty is still paid by the customer. It is just that in the case of the RAC the price is much lower: £35 representing a mark up (on £307) of 12%.

Lesson for Customers: Not all enterprises are out to get you to pay every penny. Some like the RAC settle for charging you modest amounts (mark up) in exchange for the convenience of doing nothing – saving you time and effort.

Lesson for Enterprises: Charging modest premiums in exchange for convenience is likely to be better received-experienced by your customers; I view RAC rather differently to Churchill – the latter shows up for me as greedy, the RAC shows up as fundamentally ok. If you do get caught like the RAC did then consider being gracious and generous like the RAC agent. Why? Because, it left me with the experience of gratitude to RAC rather than the experience of getting satisfaction at besting greedy Churchill.

Final Thoughts

It occurs to me that companies have made a mess of customer loyalty as they have viewed this in a selfish (transactional) manner. They have viewed loyalty in terms of getting more money from customers.  And by necessity the cost of customer loyalty falls on the customer: the customer pays to be loyal, stick with existing supplier.

So the opening for those who are up for a radical approach to doing business arises with grappling with this question: how can we create superior value for the customer such that s/he stays with us and is happy to pay a premium?  It occurs to me that Apple has been doing a great job of answering this question through its hardware, software, and ecosystem.  Which may explain why it’s value has rocketed over the last ten years. And why the market in used Apple hardware in eBay is more than all the other PC companies combined.

 

Customer Centricity: A Sunday Morning Religion?

It occurs to me that customer-centricity has become a religion in many ways. And as such is characterised by a particular philosophy-ideology, rituals and practices. We have many books-articles published on customer-centricity, customer experience, CRM, customer service etc.  We have many gurus expounding their particular philosophy of customer-centricity. We have many consultancies pushing their flavour of customer-centricity and associated paths to customer-centric nirvana. We have the IT industry pushing an array of systems under the customer-centricity and customer experience banners.  And, we have many conferences centred on the topic of customer-centricity in one or more of its flavours.

What difference does all this make when it comes to lived experience – the real world of business?  I say that customer-centricity has become the new game to play: a charade. And in this sense, customer-centricity shows up for me as a Sunday morning religion.  This was brought home to me, recently, when listening to the advice given by an engagement manager to a project manager. It went along the following lines:

“Looks like you have a happy customer. Ring up the customer and ask if he would be willing to give us a 10. If he is willing to give us a 9 or a 10 then send him the NPS survey.”

Am I faulting the engagement manager? Not at all. The engagement manager through his instruction has simply made visible the game that has become the norm under the religion of customer-centricity.  How many Christian’s who turn up on Sunday morning are actually Christians?  By that I mean how many embody-live the principles-values-practices embodied by Jesus Christ?  Please note, I am not attacking Christianity. I find that the same has occurred as regards Islam: rare is the person I encounter who calls himself a muslim and shows up for me as being as such.

I ask you consider, be with, reflect on the following sage speaking by a sage:

The intricate maze of philosophy of different schools claims to clarify matters and reveal the Truth, but in fact they create confusion where no confusion need exist. To understand anything there must needs be the understanding being. Why worry about his bodies, his ahankar, his buddhi, creation, God, Mahatmas, world – the not-Self – at all? Why not remain yourself and be in peace? Take Vedanta, for instance: it speaks of the fifteen pranas, the names and functions of which the student is asked to commit to memory. Will it not be sufficient if he is taught that only one prana does the whole work of maintaining life in the body? Again, the antahkarana is said to think, to desire, to will, to reason, etc. Why all these details? Has anyone seen the antahkarana, or all these pranas? Do they really exist? They are all conceptual divisions invented by teachers of philosophy by their excessive analysis. Where do all these concepts end? Why should confusion be created and then explained away? Fortunate is the man [person] who does not lose himself in the labyrinths of philosophy, but goes straight to the Source from which they all rise.

– Ramana Marashi

I say put aside customer lifetime value. I say put aside share of customer wallet. I say put aside big data. I say put aside data mining and predictive analytics. I say put aside CRM and CRM systems. I say put aside Voice of the Customer and Customer Experience. I say put aside customer loyalty programs….

Now ask yourself some really hard questions and answer truthfully:

  1. am I/we willing to put the needs-concerns-wellbeing of the customer at least on par with our needs-concerns-wellbeing?

  2. am I/we willing to sacrifice revenues and profits (‘bad profits’) that I/we are making from taking advantage of our customers?

  3. am I/we hungry (passionate) about coming up with products-services-solutions-experiences that simplify and enrich the lives of our customers?

The Effortless Experience: Sensational Headlines, Misleading Conclusion?

In this post I complete my take on the key assertion and the 4 findings put forth in the book The Effortless Experience.  Before I launch into this post let’s recap the following points from the first post.

Recap of the essential points from the earlier post

The four major findings put forth by the authors:

  1. A strategy of delight doesn’t pay
  2. Satisfaction is not a predictor of loyalty
  3. Customer service interaction tend to drive disloyalty, not loyalty
  4. The key to mitigating disloyalty is reducing customer effort

Let’s also get clear on the scope of the research that gave rise to these findings. The primary mechanism was post (contact centre) call surveys completed by customers. And the scope did not included the end 2 end customer experience:

An important disclosure before we reveal the results and their implications: we intentionally limited this study to service transactions and their impact on customer loyalty.

And my position?  I shared in the first post that these findings show up for me as a statement of the bleeding obvious. And it occurs to me that the headline grabbing finding “Satisfaction is not a predictor of loyalty” is misleading if not flawed.  Now I fulfil on my promise to share my rationale.

Dealing with findings 2, 3, and 4

How many studies do we need to get that satisfaction is not a predictor of loyalty?  Just look into your experience!  I can be satisfied, even delighted, with a physiotherapist and switch to a chiropractor. Why? Because by switching I reduce my travel time from 45-60 minutes (each way) to  15-20 minutes each way.  I can be satisfied with a particular restaurant and try out new restaurants that show up on my radar – usually as result of some recommendation.  I can be satisfied with a particular mobile telco and switch because of some promotion heavily promoted by a competitor …

Who does the customer turn to when s/he has a pressing issue which needs to be dealt with?  Customer Services and the folks sitting in some distant contact centre.  What does it take for a customer to make the call to these contact-centres?  My experience that many of us only call the contact centre if and only if we cannot address the issue through other means: internet, self-service channels, friends….. Why? Because, on the whole the experience of dealing with contact centres is effortful and painful.

It occurs to me that customers increasingly turn to Customer Services as a last resort and usually with the more complex issues/problems.  And on the whole the Customer Services function is not designed to help customers with these complex issues/problems;  contact-centres are staffed and run to minimise the cost of operations not to deliver a good customer experience.  As a result of the mismatch between the needs of the Customer and the design-operation of the contact-centre customers often have to force a solution out from the contact-centre.  That is to say that at best the interaction shows up as effortful. And there are many instances where the contact centre is unhelpful: quoting policy or making promises and not delivering on them as Customer Services has little power in the rest of the organisation.  Given this is it any surprising that “Customer service interaction tend to drive disloyalty, not loyalty” and “The key to mitigating disloyalty is reducing customer effort”.  Don’t take my word for it, read this post for my British Gas experience.

Dealing with the profound finding: “A strategy of delight doesn’t pay”

Take a look at delight.  What shows up?  For me, taken a phenomenological approach, the following shows up:

  1. I rarely find myself delighted in the course of interacting with companies of which I am a customer.

  2. When I do find myself delighted it is because someone who is a representative of the company , or the company itself, has ‘given’ me something that shows up for me as valuable and which I did not expect.

  3. Delight is contextual – the  content which shows up as delightful in one context does not necessarily show up as delightful in another context. For example, being upgraded from an economy seat to a business seat, in Virgin Atlantic, for a transatlantic flight showed up a delightful.  If I had been upgraded in the case of an hour flight the hassle would have probably outweighed the ‘delight’. Friendly-chatty service show up as delightful when I am relaxed and have plenty of time to spare; the same friendly-chatty service shows up as annoying-intruding-unprofessional when I am in a hurry and simply want the job done, the outcome delivered. If getting the job done turned out to be easier than I imagined, involved less effort on my part, then I tend to be delighted at how easy-effortless the experience was – whether conducting research, making a purchase, or contacting the customer services team and getting help with an issue.

  4. In service transactions there is something like a recipe for generating delight in customers. The recipe involves: solving the customer’s problem; doing so quickly not leaving the customer hanging and most likely worried; minimising the effort that the customer has to make; and last but not least the human element – how you treat the customer as a flesh and blood human being with or without respect, with warmth or with coldness/indifference, as a unique fellow human being or just another call to be handled asap to meet the call time metrics….

How do the authors of the Effortless Experience see, define and measure delight? They see it very differently to me.  They do not see delight in phenomenological terms: that which shows up in the customer’s lived experience – body and mind.  No, they have defined a strategy of delight as consisting of a number of tactics falling under the category Moments of “Wow”:

“Moments of “Wow”

– Willingness of service to go above and beyond

– Applying knowledge about customers

– Exceeding customer expectations

– Teaching the customer

– Offering alternatives

– Perceived value of alternatives”

So what the author’s research is testing, if it is testing anything, is the effectiveness of these tactics in generating delight and thus loyalty.  What if these tactics annoy customers rather than delight customers?  Just this week, I rang my broadband supplier as my patience had run out. The contact-centre agent was helpful. In between conducting the tests, and understanding the size of my home, she was telling me about a special offer (wireless range extender) that the company had on, encouraging me to take advantage of this offer, and telling me she would be happy to guide me through the online process.  Did this land as delightful for me? No! Why not? Because I just wanted her to fix my broadband so I could get my work done!  I didn’t ring to get advice. I didn’t ring to get a free wireless range extender. I range because the broadband was slow, had been slow intermittently over weeks, and that day I desperately needed the broadband to work because I had pressing work to get done and for that I needed a fast (enough) internet connection!

Now take a look at what the authors have placed under the category of Customer Effort:

“Customer Effort

– Number of transfers

– Repeating information

– First contact resolution

– Number of contacts to resolve

– Perceived additional effort to resolve

– Ease of contacting service

– Channel switching

– Time to resolve”

It occurs to me that many of the factors that are likely to lead to delight showing up in customers, as a lived bodily experience, in-around-after a customer service interaction have been placed in the Customer Effort category.

If I am correct, this exhaustive research, the millions of data points, and the subsequent profound finding “Strategy of delight doesn’t pay” is:

  • misleading at best;
  • has been misinterpreted and misreported by many in the media (including bloggers) who failed to dive into the fundamental grounds of this research;
  • does not prove that leaving customers feeling delighted does not generate an economic return.

I get that I make mistakes. If you see mistakes in the analysis that I have shared with you then please point them out to me by commenting.