To Tweet or Call, That is the Question
A colleague of mine was angry about the way Orbitz handled a service issue, so she tweeted about it. She also sent a complaint via the company's website customer support page. Orbitz responded to the Twitter posts via email, and resolved the issue; the company only ever sent a generic "we're reviewing your inquiry" email in response to the complaint sent via the website.
This made me wonder whether Orbitz's service channels are actually connected on the back end. Many companies now have people whose primary focus is tracking and responding to complaints aired in online communities and social networks; but not all of those teams are integrated with the rest of the service organization in a way that promotes information sharing.
It's possible that Orbitz responded to the tweets first because of the public nature of the network. Or perhaps the staffing-to-complaint ratio enables a faster response through that channel. The question my colleague had is why its service team didn't respond further to the complaint sent via the website--even if it was a simple autoresponse that noted that the issue was being handled through another channel. Could it actually be because the company has an integrated service operation, so those who respond to tweets know when complaints are made via more traditional channels? (And felt it unnecessary to give my colleague any indication that they knew she had also complained via the website.) Or, is it possible that Orbitz's channels aren't connected, and their website response is lacking. Unless Orbitz responds here, we may never know.
The bigger question for me, though, is whether customers are being "trained" to complain in a social forum because they know that they're more likely to get a quick response and satisfactory resolution in that venue. (And will this cause a major shift in contact center staffing over the next few years?) Or is it simply that there is such a lack of issue resolution and customer satisfaction through more traditional channels that customers are taking their grievances public to get resolution by any means necessary--or at least get the satisfaction of airing their complaints to the largest group of listeners possible? Perhaps. Perhaps some customers are trying to game the system to get a better resolution (e.g., a refund versus an apology) by going social with their complaints. I'm sure it's a mix of all these.
So how should companies respond? Obviously, they can't ignore social channels. Do they just shift with the changing tide; do they try to "train" customers to stick with traditional channels by improving the service delivery in those channels? What do you think?
Related Entries
- What's Wrong With Customer Service These Days?
- McDonald's Franchisee Shares His Employee Engagement Secret Sauce
- Guest Blogger CJ Werley: Cultural and Geographical Differences Are No Excuse for Poor Customer Service
It looks to me as a classic case of social media not being a part of their CRM strategy.
There should only be one instance of the customer and the way the customer prefers (by action)should still tie back to their (CRM) record. Their preferred method of channel can also change based on the situation. It is the process that will determine the effective and consistent response.
If Twitter or Social Monitoring is being used for sales, service or marketing strategies there are ways to integrate that process with the CRM system to ensure timely as well as effective responses. If they are currently in the database it matches, if not it can create a new contact, case and lead. (Check out Radian6's Social Monitoring-CRM integration.)
There is a big difference between hearing the customer's voice and listening to it.
If a company's CRM proceses are set up to respond to marketing, sales and service issues the Social Media channel should part of that strategy.
That sets the stage for Social CRM in action with Social Media being seamless not a separate entity.
Sound familiar? we have discussed this issue for many years.
Wow. Thanks for sharing that link!
Brent,
You're right on target. Service is definitely the new marketing. Consider the positive exposure Southwest has gotten because of its employee who tracked down the parents of a child who left his backpack on a plane, using only a receipt he found in the bag: http://www.everydaycustomerchampion.com/2009/10/louis_begin_the_sherlock_holme.html
I think training customers is out. too late for that stuff. Speaking as a customer the idea of being trained just isn't all the appealing, unless there's really great incentive for it that goes beyond the common courtesy of someone responding to my inquiry.
I think what's happening is that customers are training the vendors, and they have the power to do it. So it's up to the vendors to learn these valuable lessons in order to make customers tweet good stuff about the great service provided to them. Whether the initial request came via email, phone call, tweet or facebook page.
I guess this is all a part of why customer service is being called the new marketing - it's up to companies to make it good marketing experience instead of a united breaks guitars moment.
Thanks for the post Ginger!