We have too much of this saccharin sweet but vacuous tech support. What you really need to do is.
1) Be polite even when they are not. (The authors approach of doing this makes you sound like a teenager trying to take the car on a date, skip it)
2) hear what the customer is really saying not what you think they are saying. Don't immediately bucket them.
3) Calm the customer down. "Yes Ma'am, I don't know why it isn't working but we are going to fix it. I just need to ask a few questions..."
4) Don't waste the customer's time. This is a big one. Your staff should not be constantly calling for a manager. They should be trained before they go online.
Everything else is just trying to cover for the fact that you can't seem to do your job. If you are rude, gruff, and speak with a funny accent they will love you if you solve their problem.
I started off my career in tech as a support technician - worked on both end user/consumer product and business/corporate client support.
I can say without a doubt #3 and #4 are the absolute most important things a support technician can do - and do fast after answering the call.
I had so many irate customers - just like my wife is with me when it's her turn to call the phone company(!). The second they believed I was going to fix their problem and not waste their time - we would be on the same team.
Corollary - try hard to never, ever, EVER pass a customer to someone else. I would tell them my name, their case number and tell them if they call back to ask for me ..and then more or less demand in the case notes that the next technician pass them back to me (caveat: as long as the customer was ok with that).
I look so fondly on my time doing tech support - but geeze was it rough emotionally.
Interesting point about using a person's name. I've always associated that with a slightly patronising manner, which makes me wonder what're they after.
An old boss used to drive me up the wall, as any vaguely difficult conversation he wanted to have would be peppered with my name - it can easily go too far and rapidly become false
I absolutely hate people using my name in conversation. As you say, it feels patronizing, and to me it also feels fake and manipulative, especially in the context of customer support.
It's interesting to me how much advice about communication involves using a person's name. Do most people like hearing their name dropped frequently in conversations with strangers or near-strangers? Or is this one of those weird unproven "truths of the business" that get repeated because they sound good rather than because there's hard data backing up their effectiveness?
(I am not saying no hard data exists; I've just never seen any and the anecdotes I've heard indicate the opposite, so I'm curious.)
I feel similarly when someone uses my name more than feels natural, and I suspect my awareness of this being a persuasion technique has soured my response to others using it on me. I wonder about the technique's efficacy on people who are more or less aware of it.
You can say that in Polish, i.e. title "Pan" (Mr) or "Pani" (Ms) with either first name, last name or both. So I think people from certain cultural/linguistic backgrounds may not find it unnatural.
This seems to be common in the Philippines, home to many call centers. Many Filipinos are also prone to overusing Sir, to the point that one person I worked with used to refer to my colleagues as Sir John, Sir Bob etc (and no, this was not tongue in cheek).
I assume people do this as a result of Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People:
> Remember that a person's name is, to that person, the sweetest and most important sound in any language.
This may have been sound advice in 1936, but maybe we've just changed socially? There's a subtlety here: people like it when you remember their names, but they find it creepy if you don't have an established relationship.
If you meet someone again in a business or social context, saying "Hi, X, right?" is a reasonable way to improve rapport. Definitely better than the awkward moment where you re-introduce yourself to someone you've already met. However, when you're trying to haggle a mobile contract upgrade and the rep is constantly using your name, that's uncanny valley.
In natural conversation in American English of the 21st century, people use a name only to get your attention or to refer to you when talking to another participant.
"Pat, good to see you. Have you met Sandy?"
"Charlie? Could you explain that bit again?"
Those are natural.
Unnatural:
"Well, Bob, I'm glad you asked."
"Can I get you to sign today, Sandy?"
For short messages, I open and close with the person's name. For longer messages, I pepper in the name at points where I feel they may need a reminder that I'm here to help or to emphasize that I care. You're right that if you overdo it, you can create a Stepford-Wives vibe, but if you write the way you speak, it should be pretty easy to avoid.
I suppose to reassure them of the personal touch -- that this isn't a copy+paste response. But to me it usually feels forced. Much better to find a more natural way to remind them this is a personalized message, like referencing their situation. "As this is an urgent request, Jennifer, we can provide..." vs. "As this is an urgent request due to your upcoming status meeting, we can provide...".
I don't think it goes very far to reassure me that a response is copy/pasted or machine-written. My name could be as easily pulled from a database as from someone's memory.
At the child dentist I take my kids to, they call men "Dad" and women "Mom". For example, "Okay, Dad, we're here to get a check up for John today? Just fill out this form, Dad." It's awful and I hate it.
edit: I hate it for the same patronizing feeling you described. I love hearing my kids call me "Dad", not strangers.
There are also many cultures where using someone's first name is outright rude. In Japan, this is reserved for very close friends; in Finland, calling somebody by first name in conversation just sounds odd, period. You already know who I am and have my attention, why are you repeating it?
If you are contacting a customer, and the customer was not expecting your communication, calling by name is an additional way to assure that the communication is not made by mistake.
Person to person, it should be used in moderation, like, well, anything else.
Maybe it's just me, but 'negative' politeness has always been my default conversation mode. I didn't even know what it was until a few months ago, or that people studied 'politeness strategies'. Being deferential with words leaves open the opportunity for dialogue, and doesn't bite you in the ass if you're mistaken. Of course, it can be appropriate to be more direct in certain circumstances, and tone can change the perception of modal statements from sincere to patronizing very easily. Still, to me, it seems like people are more willing to seriously consider direct statements when it's not your usual attitude. "This person is very careful about making definite statements, and they seem very confident about what they just said". When what you want isn't to manipulate people but to have them open their mind to the possibility that what you're saying is true, that train of thought (and I know this exists because I've thought so myself several times) is very valuable.
In the cultural context where I come from (Estonia), using ones name while NOT being friends is a sure way to sound very passive aggressive.
Doing this in a formal dialogue pretty much guarantees that the person on the receiving end will consider the other party to be very much a dick.
I am pretty sure that it's not just Estonia, but Finland too.
Yep, I'm from Finland and to me, using a person's name in a potential conflict situation just feels like trying to make the problem personal. In the article's examples, like "I’m not entirely sure we can do that, Liam", I hear an unspoken "you fool" at the end.
What’s the real meaning behind the words they’re using? ... Put yourself in their shoes and understand the problem you need to solve.
I've found it to my great advantage to let the customer know that I can (hold the ability), and that I will (choose to) help them. This needs to be spoken as well as using the correct tone. Nothing is more frustrating to a client than to feel like they are not being heard. Of course, you have to back this up with actions.
Sometimes I have a customer who is really a trouble maker, I tend to shut them down quickly because I've dealt with their type before. But I feel like there must be a better way. I know it'll end the same (they won't agree with my pricing, terms, support, yadda) but maybe a better parting of ways.
Following the 80/20 on everything. You'll get 80% of your business from 20% of your customers, and you'll get 80% of all problems from 20% of your customers. Figure out who is in the 20% of problem customers who isn't in the 20% of profit customers, and fire them. Even better if you can refer them to your competitors.
You can offer them what they are seeking, but with terms they are not willing to go along with. This way they are the ones ultimatey saying “no”.
It’s just like giving a quote for an unsavory work gig.
You essentially ask for “more” (work, time, etc) on their part in exchange for your commitment.
I suppose this is probably considered some type of negotiation.
If you are customer-facing then you are not necessarily in a position of power. However, I've found success in getting the customer to listen and take action based on my recommendations by mirroring the mentioned tone and vocab. In this manner you essentially assume an indirect position of power without offending the customer.
The number of times I've been faced with condescending comments from developers of mobile and web apps here and on reddit is pretty amazing to me. The presumption of cluelessness on the part of most developers faced with any kind of non-praise feedback is stark and amazing. I can understand why it exists -- since the degree of cluelessness out there is quite amazing -- but it's pretty much anathema to anything in good customer service.
Could you just
Sorry, but that phrase is not necessarily softer. It can also be quite harsh!
What this article misses is adapting diction to the customer (at least in non offensive ways.) For example, in my business I deal with a lot of mental health professionals that tend to use a lot more bigger words. I match my word choices to their own diction and tone, “educated collegues conversing.” While when I am dealing with therapy clients, it’s more variable: For a customer that uses words common in the South (such as y’all,) I will flow with that, for European customers, I become more clear and deliberate with my word choices, as an example. Having been a long term expat, that ability to adapt English diction to the audience has been invaluable — just don’t be patronizing or rude obviously. Just match the other person and stay within their vocabulary and diction comfort level. That’s very powerful and it works.
Most of my irritation with customer service here in India arises out of pure and unbridled stupidity, or dishonesty, particularly with some notorious companies.
I remember a few years ago I wanted to cancel my internet connection and the agent argued that I had a bill due, which I hadn't paid because I was told I didn't need to pay until their services were restored (their fiber was damaged for several months).
Eventually I said I didn't want to cancel, but I wanted to know the status of my complaint, which I had filed a few months prior when the fiber was damaged. The agent said that there was a record of me confirming that my connectivity had been restored (an obvious lie or fabrication).
Then I said I wanted to issue a new complaint that my connection wasn't working.
At this point, almost seamlessly I was told that my area had no connectivity due to a fiber cable that was damaged a few months ago.
That is around the time when I become irate, at which point I was begrudgingly told that payment was not needed.
My experience with Airtel has been that a well-written and firm email describing my intention for a complaint is very effective. Also a simple "I will not pay for your service if you don't resolve this" gets you very far with customer service.
I'm waiting for the rumored Jio fiber thing to fuck up Airtel's business, just like they did with the mobile services.
The article raises some good points, but it's worth considering that even if you take note of everything written here and everything ever written about striking the right tone of voice as a customer service agent, you may still end up sounding patronising, repetitive or dismissive. Because your communication will often be surrounded by some wider context. Consumer services aimed at less technical customers are well-known for this sort of thing - addressed them by name? Check. Sprinkled in some positive words? Check. But none of that matters if you've gotten their name wrong or are replying in exactly the same tone to every customer in a public forum. Your attempts at improving communications just end up making people frustrated.
As someone working in a customer facing role for a lot of my tech career, most of it is sound advice. The one missing item that isn't is deescalating urgent situations by not assigning blame during the interaction.
Realistically customer service is done by a team rather than one individual and the members of that team will vary in ability. Tactics are therefore needed to get the company tone of voice right regardless of who is on the phones and tickets on a given day.
Customer service need support too. If a customer service team is well supported and not considered lowest of the low within the company then they will naturally project a more confident and enthusiastic tone than if they are not supported, not considered worthy and seemingly at a never ending queue of work that can never be done to their own or the customers satisfaction.
How to achieve this? A high level of automation helps. A contact us page that has relevant boxes is a good start, if you know that they will need something sent to them in the post or proof of purchase details then you can ask for that up front and have an automated response that puts their ticket on hold emailing them for missing details. These emails can be in a template where the tone of voice is well considered and polite, not the text speak of a busy customer service agent.
Reducing time on the phone is also important, if you need to send a code to someone, e.g. a coupon code for goodwill reasons, then you can make that code a simple mix of letters and numbers that take less time to dictate over the phone, unambiguous (no '1's, 'l's) and you can also embed a digit that the customer service can easily check for validity. 'A23S45J' will be easier to dictate than 'XJWR-TYWE-RE3T-TTT3', taking a lot less than half the time. Furthermore, the 'A' in 'A23S45J' could be the code for January and 'S' + 'J' could be the initials of that particular customer service agent, so, in aggregate you know who in the team is giving out the freebees (or converting angry customers into happy ones).
Supporting the customer service team also requires having good answers, so if you have a duff product and lots of people complaining about it then you don't want to have the customer service team taking the customer side and 'going rogue' against the company in off-piste ways. Or, on the flipside, having the customer service team getting angry with the customers in this unsolvable situation.
There also needs to be useful metrics, 'quality circles' to make sure that new areas of complaint can be solved in a structured manner and also some mechanism for feedback from the support desk to other company departments, e.g. design. It is no good if the guys in design take six months to learn of a new product flaw.
The more you can get the customer service team to feel that they are winning and are valued then the more confident and enthusiastic they will be. This tone will naturally be projected to customers and, if you get that right then there is no reason for a formerly angry customer to not right a rave review, to become a fan of the product and for their online review to be valued to the customer service team as well as to other potential customers.
As for using the customer's name, if a customer service agent is on top of their game, i.e. enthusiastic and confident rather than overwhelmed, then they will be far more inclined to develop a personal 'bond' with the customer to solve their problem and use their name as a matter of course. It should be a pleasure to pick up the phone in less than three rings for a customer service agent rather than phones ringing off the hook with every call prefaced by fear and dread.
If problems can't be solved then no amount of couched faux language and name dropping will help the situation.
Sometimes the customer is wrong and it's not an issue with the service. And sometimes the customer is rude. I won't expect any human being to accept rude behavior from anybody.
Organisations are often systemically rude, whether by evolution or design. This is not occult knowledge.
And not all organisations are bad at customer support. I'm also aware that solutions aren't always immediately forthcoming. But it should be possible to move toward resolution on a continuous track, respecting the customer's tiime, intelligence (if indicated), and humanity.
Endless holds, bureaucratic busywork, front-line incompetence, inability to retain state on aan issue, etc., are all failures.
Counterexamples: Apple will schedule support calls or call back rather than keep customers on hold. Various no-hasssle return or exchange policies reduce customer risk or aapprehension. I frequently find far more competence among field techs than phone support, even in notorious areas such as residential / SOHO telecoms, as the techs directly interface with both equipment and customers. I've known enterprise software and hardware vendors who go all-out in ensuring customer satisfaction (though you frequently pay up front for this).
Invert these instances, and you'll find what I was calling out above.
And very little of the competence has to do with voice-honing. It comes from knowing how to do the fucking job and being authorised and expected to do just that.
It means training, retaining, equipping, respecting, and rewarding support staff for doing just this.
And not resorting to cheap, manipulative, ineffective, gimmicks.
1) Be polite even when they are not. (The authors approach of doing this makes you sound like a teenager trying to take the car on a date, skip it)
2) hear what the customer is really saying not what you think they are saying. Don't immediately bucket them.
3) Calm the customer down. "Yes Ma'am, I don't know why it isn't working but we are going to fix it. I just need to ask a few questions..."
4) Don't waste the customer's time. This is a big one. Your staff should not be constantly calling for a manager. They should be trained before they go online.
Everything else is just trying to cover for the fact that you can't seem to do your job. If you are rude, gruff, and speak with a funny accent they will love you if you solve their problem.