Customer Service Is No Secret

From time to time, customers write letters on PlanetFeedback in which they claim they will never shop at that company's stores again as a result of the treatment they received.  One such letter was recently sent to Victoria's Secret.  The customer was upset with the snotty, snobby attitude she received from the VS employee.

Whenever these kinds of letters appear on PFB, they're usually followed by a series of comments which question why that customer would give up on a chain based on just one bad experience.

This raises an interesting proposition - at what point IS a customer entitled to choose not to patronize a store and what obligation do they have to help a business keep their business?

Our stance is simple...a customer is entitled to "fire" a business after one bad experience and owes a business absolutely nothing in terms of keeping their business; if they so choose.

Customers are the lifeblood of business.  Without them, businesses would cease to exist.  A customer's choice as to where to spend their money is governed by a great number of factors which include price/value/location/convenience AND level of customer service.  These are the driving forces behind a company's marketing efforts as well as their customer service initiatives.

It's the business who must earn the customer's trust and that trust can be broken by as little as a bad experience.  Certainly everyone has a bad day and employees are not exempt from that however they still remain the face of the company and companies understand that even one bad encounter can cost big time in the long run.  And it's not the customer's responsibility to "help" the business figure out how to best serve them.

It's certainly nice when a customer gives a business repeated chances and we certainly don't condemn them for doing so but when someone decides they won't do so, why should they be criticized?  It's their money - it's their choice and businesses must respect their ability to make that choice. 

After all, in that same comment section, we often see criticism of customers who are upset because they keep getting bad service from the same company ala "WHY DO YOU KEEP GOING BACK?"

Twould seem like it's a no win situation however it's not.  Customers have leverage which they can use and a huge part of that leverage is to take their business elsewhere if they aren't satisfied.  Now, more than ever, there are a huge number of choices and the company which takes business for granted is one that isn't likely to remain in business for long.

-Contributed by Greg

Comments

[Venice]

There's a tremendous difference between one bad experience and being a glutton for punishment by continuing to patronize a business that constantly disappoints. I think the key is in how the company responds and handles a complaint. With the proper response and action from Victoria's Secret, I see no reason why a customer would not continue shopping there.

I gave up trying to change the world a long time ago. Customer service isn't what it used to be, and the customers themselves are partly to blame. That's why when letter writers make ridiculous and unreasonable demands, commenters try to give them a dose of reality. If companies gave in to all the demands of today's consumers, they'd all go out of business, and that hurts everyone.

Brace yourself because it's only going to get worse. In these hard economic times, consumers are going to want miracles for their money. I see it in the letters already. People are now determined to make every dollar count and will want an even bigger bang for their buck. And businesses are not going to be able to bow to the demands without the risk of closing their doors.

I have never requested anything from a company that wasn't fair and reasonable, which is probably why I always walk away a satisfied customer. Today's consumer needs to realize it's a two-way street, and only then will they get results. The resolution might not live up to their outrageous demand, but I'm banking on it being fair.

[Greg]

Contrary to the "popular wisdom" on PFB, a vast majority of customers are not unreasonable nor do they make outrageous demands. Most customers are like the lady who wrote the Victoria Secret letter - reasonable folks who just want to be heard.

The people who write letters on PFB that are over the top are not representative at all of the general public. They appear in larger numbers on PFB simply because the nature of our site is such that we're the place of last resort when they've tried to get their issues resolved with little success. Yes, there are some folks who turn to PFB as a first resort however, again, they are not representative of consumers as a whole.

[Venice]

I thought the writer of the letter to Victoria's Secret was quite reasonable, and she deserves an acknowledgment of her complaint from the company. But I also believe that if this was her first poor experience, she'll be doing herself a disservice by boycotting the entire chain. It's her decision, of course, but personally I wouldn't deprive myself of shopping in one of my favorite stores over one rude employee. That employee could be gone next week while I'll still be missing my store.

I think too many people are over the top today, which is what puts companies on the defensive. It ruins it for the reasonable ones. And yes, I agree that they are still in the majority.

[AliciaButler]

As someone who used to work in the customer service industry (for 10+ years) I can understand the mindset of the "typical" employee and their motives- regardless, as to whether or not they give stellar customer service, or service that should drive consumers away. Many times, poor customer service is driven by management that strives to uphold policies and procedures, above what really matters; the customer. However, on the flip-side, I have seen customers act irate, irrational, and of course, the occasional person whose main goal is to take advantage of the "system." Unfortunately, I can attest to the fact; many corporations feel the same way the woman shopping at Victoria's Secret felt, "if you don't like the way we do business, you can shop somewhere else." As consumers, we absolutely hate that- the customer is always right... right? As much as it infuriates us to think someone is willing to write us off, as much as we hate to believe someone would actually NOT WANT to take our money, we are responsible for our actions and we have the same right to deny someone our business as a proprietor has to decide what matters more to them- our customer loyalty- or their policies. Regardless, many companies, such as Victoria's Secret, Nordstrom's, Abercrombie and Fitch, and Sak's Fith Avenue, actually create an environment a certain demographic wans to shop in. Corporations are no longer selling merely, jewelery, underwear, and cosmetics, they are selling the right to buy a certain image. And if their customers no longer feel the trade-off is fair, they can choose to go to a store that offers basically the same product, in addition to the customer service policies that fit their needs.

The history of standards for contemporary quality systems traces back to 1959. Then, the U.S. Department of Defense released a quality management program under the designation MIL-Q-9858. For nearly three decades, this standard was primarily used in the U.S. defense and aerospace industries. In the mid 1960s, the former Soviet Union introduced a national standard (KC YKP) in an attempt to manage quality across the country.