From a customer point of view what matters is an ‘effective’ organisation – one that is good at anticipating and responding to the diversity of customers and their needs. That means designing the organisation to be flexible, adaptable, versatile – this allows the organisation to absorb and effectively deal with the variety of demands that are placed on the organisation by customers. This in turn requires the organisation to have ‘redundancy’ built into it. That is a fancy way of saying that it needs extra resources (“fat”) to deal with and take advantages of unexpected difficulties and opportunities – to cater for the inherent unpredictability of the world. Finally, making the parts work well together (integration) is a key requirement of effectiveness. Think of a car it is only of value if all the components work well together.
Organisations are enmeshed in an ideology that values efficiency and structure that lends towards fragmentation. The focus is on cutting out all the ‘fat’ so as to minimise operating costs and thus drive efficiency. This way of thinking involves lots of efforts in up front forecasting and planning to predict and manage demand. It also involves finding and standardising on the one best way of doing things and then striving to make customers, employees, suppliers and partners to use that one way. This way of thinking encourages and insists that managers control the real world – at least their piece of it: to act on it so as to force it into the shape that was envisaged in the plan.
So customers want organisation to dance to their specific, individual, tunes. Whereas organisations insist that customers fall into line – the line that reduces operating costs and thus maximises profitability. That is how we come to the gaping hole between what customers want and what organisations deliver.
Sometimes the gaping hole gets smaller – at least for a while – when the organisation finds a way of being effective (customer perspective) by taking actions that improve efficiency. Enter the category of self-service: ATMs, electronic banking, e-boarding card, well designed IVRs to do standard stuff like top up mobile phones come to mind. At other times the gaping hole grows larger: sales assistants who know less about the products then the shopper, badly designed IVRs, waiting a long time to speak to a human being, call centre agents who are not in a position to help and so pass you on and then on again and so forth.
The fascinating thing about ‘social media’ is that it provides a great opportunity for organisations to be effective (from a customer perspective) whilst being firmly wedded to efficiency. Yet, there is little movement in the direction of social media because there are a couple of things organisations are more wedded to than efficiency. Secrecy, ownership and control – in every organisation lurks the dictator. Again we have a divide: customers want organisations to be open, truthful, clear and collaborative. Organisations are wedded to secrecy, spin, ambiguity, ownership and control. And this divide explains why so few organisations have adopted social media to bring customers into the heart of the organisation.
So the challenge that falls to the customer experience designer is how to deliver the effectiveness, openness, transparency and participation that customers want whilst being embedded in an organisation that worships at the altar of efficiency, secrecy, ownership and control – sacrificing many customers in the process. This is not an easy trick to pull off and it is why I have profound respect for all the people in organisations battling to improve the customer experience!