Musings of a Former Customer Service Manager

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Musings of a Former Customer Service Manager

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Musings of a Former Customer Service Manager

Analyst posted 03-11-99 11:43 AM ET
OK, I was actually an assistant manager in the department, but I did manage to learn a thing or two in that former life. I'm going to start this thread in the hopes that a few people can learn a few things before it degenerates into the predictable flow of arguments between the usual suspects.
First, as to the arguments going on elsewhere, my experience tells me that everybody is right and everybody is wrong. Yeah, I know that doesn't make sense, but if you keep reading, it might by the end of this post.
The company I did customer service work for was a mail order plant company. I actually think that, on a cerain level, this is a very good analogy to trying to work out the problems vending software. In both cases, you're going to have a certain predictable amount of product failures based on the incompatability between your product (software/plants) and the environment (comupters/gardens) that the product is going to be installed in. No matter how well you make your product, some installations are going to fail because a certain amount of your customers are going to lack the expertise to make it work and some are going to fail because the product is absolutely incompatible with the installation environment (often for unpredictable and complicated reasons).
The question then becomes: how are you going to handle these product failures as a company? We handled it by having a large team of well-trained representatives who acted as the first line of defense/help/handholding with customer difficulties. Most problems could be solved by simple analysis of the environment and installation. If the problem seemed to admit of a more complex analysis and solution, we had a few "horticulturalists" (people who adtually had advanced college degrees in the subject) to refer customers to who were determined to solve their problems with matching product to environment. We also had an absolute replacement/100% moneyback guarantee, which would be applied in the event that other solutions failed. A good representative, however, didn't need to throw money at customers to solve problems. In short, we had a complete system, with training, rules, procedures and failsafes to ensure customer satisfaction. The philosophy underlying the whole system was that each and every complaint actually represented a marketing opportunity. There is no better source of word of mouth business than a customer who perceives that you cared enough to solve his problems at your expense. Any loss you take on the single transaction is expected to be made up at a later date by that marketing success.
Now, the people representing Firaxis in a customer service capacity are absolutely right that theirs is a superior product. The people defending Firaxis on these forums are absolutely right that most program failures are due to a combination of customer ignorance and bad environments. These observations also absolutely applied to the plants my company was sending people too. The problem is that it's just not going to go anywhere, in a customer service sense, to preach the superiority of your product to a customer with dead plants (or a program that crashes). It's also generally not a good idea to explain to customers that they probably have dead plants because they're bad gardeners (or dead programs because their computer is bad). That's not the kind of thing that brings them back for repeat orders. So the people offering the opposing point of view, that these excuses are useless to themselves as consumers, are also right. There's simply no place for such excuses in a customer service environment.
The problem, as I view it, is not that SMAC is a bad product or that Firaxis doesn't care about it's customers. The problem is that Firaxis is trying to handle customer service by pressing a handful of programmers into duty as customer service representatives with no training in customer relations techniques and no model to follow for resolving customer problems, especially as it relates to dissatisfaction with the product. The upshot is that Jeff Morris is a great guy and he tries, but he's not given the proper resources or training to do this job, and if he has a bad day, potentially loyal customers are going to be turned into angry ex-customers.
The solution is simple: some of this hefty cashflow from SMAC needs to be earmarked towards developing a customer service model appropriate to Firaxis' business goals and implementing this model in the form of persons trained to perform that task backed by appropriate procedures and an appropriate budget. Properly executed, this is not a business expense, but a profit center from the additional marketing opportunities created by proper customer service intervention.
I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen, however, because (and this is what the Uncle's of the world need to accept) the software market, at present, is heavily pressured by the demand curve. In other words, it's a seller's market and handsome profits can be made without attention to customer service issues. Perfecting customer service can maximimize the profit margin in this business (just like any other) but it's not necessary to have customer service to generate the profits. That wasn't true in the mail order plant business. Our marketing studies showed us that we were eating our competitor's lunch on the service issue. The difference is that plants was a mature (and largely static) market. Software is an expanding market driven by the demand curve. I've resigned myself to the knowledge that this will only change when service begins to become the difference between making a profit and not making one in the software industry. Until then, software companies with professionally designed and managed customer service teams will continue to be the exception and not the rule.
DanS posted 03-11-99 11:57 AM ET
I can appreciate your point of view. However, EA really handles the technical support for this game, and I'm sure they have a similar model to what you describe.
Firaxis gives out technical support here because they get unfiltered bug reports and they want to see a thriving, happy SMAC community. Jeffrey's time, in this respect, is well spent on these boards.
But no need to duplicate efforts.
Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS posted 03-11-99 11:57 AM ET
More good points. I actually have almost 3 years in technical support, so I'm not completely a babe in the woods. We do have the entire Electronic Arts Customer Service department at our disposal, but rather than just brush customers off and say contact EA when they post here, I try to get them running. Electronic Arts supports a huge number of products, and even though they have a large department, sometimes it takes days for an email to be responded to. They also have a fairly wide range of experience levels, so that when you do get a response, it can solve the problem, or insult your intelligence. Many people don't want to wait, so they post here.
In other words, I'm doing the best that I can.
jkm
firaxis games
Analyst posted 03-11-99 12:22 PM ET
Mr. Morris, my apologies for underestimating both yourself and the capacity of your organization in the area of customer service. I think we both agree, however, that the greater part of my musings are not negated by that misapprehension. You've been assigned a peculiarly public version of the customer service task (public postings of bug complaints and responses is not a system I would design were I in charge, but I guess neither one of us runs the show, eh?) and I do not envy you your position. Just try not to have any more bad days
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Musings of a Former Customer Service Manager
Analyst	posted 03-11-99 11:43 AM ET OK, I was actually an assistant manager in the department, but I did manage to learn a thing or two in that former life. I'm going to start this thread in the hopes that a few people can learn a few things before it degenerates into the predictable flow of arguments between the usual suspects. First, as to the arguments going on elsewhere, my experience tells me that everybody is right and everybody is wrong. Yeah, I know that doesn't make sense, but if you keep reading, it might by the end of this post. The company I did customer service work for was a mail order plant company. I actually think that, on a cerain level, this is a very good analogy to trying to work out the problems vending software. In both cases, you're going to have a certain predictable amount of product failures based on the incompatability between your product (software/plants) and the environment (comupters/gardens) that the product is going to be installed in. No matter how well you make your product, some installations are going to fail because a certain amount of your customers are going to lack the expertise to make it work and some are going to fail because the product is absolutely incompatible with the installation environment (often for unpredictable and complicated reasons). The question then becomes: how are you going to handle these product failures as a company? We handled it by having a large team of well-trained representatives who acted as the first line of defense/help/handholding with customer difficulties. Most problems could be solved by simple analysis of the environment and installation. If the problem seemed to admit of a more complex analysis and solution, we had a few "horticulturalists" (people who adtually had advanced college degrees in the subject) to refer customers to who were determined to solve their problems with matching product to environment. We also had an absolute replacement/100% moneyback guarantee, which would be applied in the event that other solutions failed. A good representative, however, didn't need to throw money at customers to solve problems. In short, we had a complete system, with training, rules, procedures and failsafes to ensure customer satisfaction. The philosophy underlying the whole system was that each and every complaint actually represented a marketing opportunity. There is no better source of word of mouth business than a customer who perceives that you cared enough to solve his problems at your expense. Any loss you take on the single transaction is expected to be made up at a later date by that marketing success. Now, the people representing Firaxis in a customer service capacity are absolutely right that theirs is a superior product. The people defending Firaxis on these forums are absolutely right that most program failures are due to a combination of customer ignorance and bad environments. These observations also absolutely applied to the plants my company was sending people too. The problem is that it's just not going to go anywhere, in a customer service sense, to preach the superiority of your product to a customer with dead plants (or a program that crashes). It's also generally not a good idea to explain to customers that they probably have dead plants because they're bad gardeners (or dead programs because their computer is bad). That's not the kind of thing that brings them back for repeat orders. So the people offering the opposing point of view, that these excuses are useless to themselves as consumers, are also right. There's simply no place for such excuses in a customer service environment. The problem, as I view it, is not that SMAC is a bad product or that Firaxis doesn't care about it's customers. The problem is that Firaxis is trying to handle customer service by pressing a handful of programmers into duty as customer service representatives with no training in customer relations techniques and no model to follow for resolving customer problems, especially as it relates to dissatisfaction with the product. The upshot is that Jeff Morris is a great guy and he tries, but he's not given the proper resources or training to do this job, and if he has a bad day, potentially loyal customers are going to be turned into angry ex-customers. The solution is simple: some of this hefty cashflow from SMAC needs to be earmarked towards developing a customer service model appropriate to Firaxis' business goals and implementing this model in the form of persons trained to perform that task backed by appropriate procedures and an appropriate budget. Properly executed, this is not a business expense, but a profit center from the additional marketing opportunities created by proper customer service intervention. I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen, however, because (and this is what the Uncle's of the world need to accept) the software market, at present, is heavily pressured by the demand curve. In other words, it's a seller's market and handsome profits can be made without attention to customer service issues. Perfecting customer service can maximimize the profit margin in this business (just like any other) but it's not necessary to have customer service to generate the profits. That wasn't true in the mail order plant business. Our marketing studies showed us that we were eating our competitor's lunch on the service issue. The difference is that plants was a mature (and largely static) market. Software is an expanding market driven by the demand curve. I've resigned myself to the knowledge that this will only change when service begins to become the difference between making a profit and not making one in the software industry. Until then, software companies with professionally designed and managed customer service teams will continue to be the exception and not the rule.
DanS	posted 03-11-99 11:57 AM ET I can appreciate your point of view. However, EA really handles the technical support for this game, and I'm sure they have a similar model to what you describe. Firaxis gives out technical support here because they get unfiltered bug reports and they want to see a thriving, happy SMAC community. Jeffrey's time, in this respect, is well spent on these boards. But no need to duplicate efforts.
Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS	posted 03-11-99 11:57 AM ET More good points. I actually have almost 3 years in technical support, so I'm not completely a babe in the woods. We do have the entire Electronic Arts Customer Service department at our disposal, but rather than just brush customers off and say contact EA when they post here, I try to get them running. Electronic Arts supports a huge number of products, and even though they have a large department, sometimes it takes days for an email to be responded to. They also have a fairly wide range of experience levels, so that when you do get a response, it can solve the problem, or insult your intelligence. Many people don't want to wait, so they post here. In other words, I'm doing the best that I can. jkm firaxis games
Analyst	posted 03-11-99 12:22 PM ET Mr. Morris, my apologies for underestimating both yourself and the capacity of your organization in the area of customer service. I think we both agree, however, that the greater part of my musings are not negated by that misapprehension. You've been assigned a peculiarly public version of the customer service task (public postings of bug complaints and responses is not a system I would design were I in charge, but I guess neither one of us runs the show, eh?) and I do not envy you your position. Just try not to have any more bad days