Tag Archives: Google

Is Customer Service Relevant to Your Business?

I recently listened to a technical webcast where one of the panelists suggested how absurd it was to say that “IT (information technology) needs to align with the business.”  The speaker’s point was that we don’t ask if Sales or Finance or Marketing are aligned with the business.  Instead, we take it for granted that these functional units are part of the business (and thus aligned).  Can the same be said for Customer Service?

The fact that the IT question even exists is instructive because it points to the increasing possibility that IT can be disjoined from the business if it loses relevancy.  (IT loses its relevancy as simple “open market” alternatives emerge where users can satisfy their needs faster than they can through IT, their so-called “preferred supplier.”  e.g. GoogleMail vs. Outlook.)

Can customer service be separated from the business, and is it appropriate to ask if Customer Service aligns with the business?  Yes to both.  If customer service is seen only as a cost and not as a benefit to the business, we should expect this question to retain its significance.

Sales stays above the debate fray because they add to the top line.  Finance escapes because of their oversight.  But in some dysfunctional companies and cultures it is not clear how/if Customer Service (and indeed IT) help grow revenues.  (Hint: here are some ways to quantify customer service success that are meaningful to the business.)

The pivot point is that Customer Service leaders must explicitly tie their work to corporate value unless they want to be cast adrift in a sea of irrelevance.

In the end, perhaps we ask the wrong question.  Instead we should ask “is your business aligned with your customers?”

In the coming weeks, we’ll examine the four (4) pillars essential to aligning your business with customers’ needs:

  1. Employees
  2. Products
  3. Communication
  4. Leadership

Don’t miss an update; subscribe here.

Buy and Hold Your Customers

Many anecdotes illustrate that market timing is extremely difficult.  Too many moving parts and too many variables make timing the market almost impossible.  As a result:

  • Portfolio managers seek companies that have sustainable and unique value propositions
  • Financial advisors suggest we diversify our holdings and practice a hands-off buy and hold strategy

In short, find a good product and a good management team and sit tight.  Why are so many companies willing to sacrifice customer service and abandon customers?

Somewhere we’ve gotten off track.  Mickey Edwards wrote an interesting article not long ago in The Atlantic titled “The Business of Business”.  He writes that companies seeking to do good while seeking profit can create sustainable models that benefit themselves and their communities.  Too many businesses treat the business of business purely as maximizing profits.

Similarly, too many businesses treat the business of customer service as an exercise in constant cost cuts.

  • This behavior is rational because of our short-term fixation on quarterly earnings
  • Reductions on top of reductions eventually impact customers
  • We all lose over the long-term

When shareholders and businesses would rather pursue a quick buck rather than developing a sustainable business model we inevitably lose employee trust, erode shareholder confidence and weaken our business.

If we agree that we want sustainable and profitable businesses, it stands to reason we want sustainable (i.e. satisfied) and profitable customers.  The pivot point is that cutting resources, eventually cuts profits. We invest tremendous resources to “buy” our customers now let’s hold them as if they’re worth gold… after all, they are.

The Secret to Accomplishing More

It’s no secret that customer service departments, like all others, are asked to do more with less.  The secret (shhh), is companies that do a few things with focus, are better able to satisfy their customers than companies that do many things with mediocrity.  On the other hand, Google who recently launched their Nexus One phone, proved something entirely different; if you fail to do something important (in this case, customer service) you satisfy absolutely no one.

A recent study of cell phones and driver distraction conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute indicated that texting while driving, increases the likelihood of a collision by over twenty (20) times.  Our hubris is so great that we still think we are the exception.  We believe we are uniquely able to drive, talk, drink coffee, change lanes, etc.  Yet our confidence plummets while our NYC cab driver texts while driving to our next destination?  Now we might want a little more focus, a little less multi-tasking.

This same premise applies to organizations.  When studies show one person has a limited capacity to multi-task what makes us think that hundreds of people are capable of doing so?  It must be hubris talking again.  It is absurd to think we can successfully engage many individuals in simultaneous multi-tasking when we can’t get one to do so.  At some point the law of diminishing returns kicks in.

Companies who hope for the greatest gains must de-prioritize as aggressively as they prioritize.  They must choose the most impactful/profitable projects at the expense of other projects.  In short, they must choose to either drive or text.

The pivot point is that people (and organizations) can adapt to a limited amount of change.    This year, when you’re deciding to implement a new CRM technology, institute a new process to handle customer complaints, or even rolling out a revolutionary new cell phone, focus on doing a few things and resolve do them well.  Doubt this will work?  Consider the alternative.  Better yet, ask Nexus One customers if they wish Google had focused just a bit more on customer service.