Most frequently, when a customer contacts a supplier to
complain about a product or service, the focus is upon how the failure of the
item impacted on the consumer. Often,
that focus becomes more intensified when the client feels that the company is
not paying sufficient attention to the matter.
There are two main factors at play here: The company’s (more
likely, the company representative’s) initial reaction is defensiveness. “The integrity of my product (or service) is
being challenged.” It is a personal affront.
The customer’s initial action is anger and aggressiveness. “You sold me garbage. I won’t be abused by you.” Neither stance is fully correct or very
effective. And so, the conflict often
escalates.
However, there are tried-and-true techniques for mitigating disputes
and exploring satisfactory solutions. They revolve around understanding each
other, before initiating contact or insisting on immediate, arbitrary resolution.
The first thing that a consumer should be aware of is that the business must
be in the business of customer service, if it intends to survive. Therefore, it is as motivated to find a
solution that is satisfactory to it as you are to find one satisfactory to
you. At the outset, it may not seem like
these two objectives are similar, compatible or even capable of being based on
common ground. But, almost always, they
are.
Initial contact should follow the same path, whether it be
by email, telephone, or letter. Begin by
knowing both your rights and obligations.
Begin by ascertaining, for certain, if the problem is the company’s, the
product’s, your own, or a combination of the three. Be balanced and objective in your assessment,
even if the issue is personal and subjective.
And, vitally, be open and receptive to proposals and suggestions.
The vast majority of complaints can be resolved with the
first contact. Some require one or two
follow-ups, while others can be drawn out, complex and protracted. Determine, before you begin, how much time,
cost and effort you are willing to expend to reach a settlement. Then, stick with the plan! The sequence is the same, regardless of the
duration.
Let us use a sample case, to illustrate the techniques at
work.
George has issues with his cell phone provider. First, his phone has given him problems since
he signed the three-year contract last year. Second, he has been charged,
infrequently, for long distance charges, even though the calls were made to
exempt numbers. In the past, the phone
company has reversed the charges. Third,
he has an issue with “dead zone” coverage.
That matter has not been resolved.
Today, he finds that, when he crossed the border last month, he shut off
his phone, and when he returned, as soon as he re-entered the country, he
switched his phone on, parked, retrieved his messages and made two local
calls. He was charged a very high
roaming fee, even though he was already back in his own coverage zone. It was the last straw, and he is furious.
But wait. Each
problem may be unique.
The first issue, with the phone itself. Twice he has returned to the retailer, who
patiently showed him how to use the various features. Both times, the problems
were not that of the phone, but of his inexperience. But he blames the phone for being too
complex.
Solution: Accept that he needs to devote more time to
learning the phone operation, or that he needs to trade in his phone for one
that more properly meets his needs and capabilities. Don’t lay the complaint at the feet of his
carrier!
Second problem – incorrect billing. He
researches consumer complaints, and finds that this is a common problem, but
common to all four carriers in his region.
He may want to write a complaint to the Consumer’s Bureau, or other
government watchdog that oversees telecommunications and telephone
providers. If there are several other
valid issues, it may also form the basis for future efforts to cancel the contract,
or seek compensation.
But he has four issues, and to try to resolve them all at
once will cloud discussions and hinder mutual understanding. He needs to focus on one, at most two
complaints in each contact. If two are
related, this lends itself well to strengthening the complaint process. In this example, his third issue and fourth may be
intertwined, since dead zones and overlapping coverage may be tower or
broadcast strength matters. He should
focus this complaint on the last two.
Anyway, larger companies, such as wireless carriers of telephone
service, tend to catalogue complaints and reference them by client number, so
he will already be on file with prior matters.
Now, he has decided to work on the last two matters,
systematically. He opts to begin with a
telephone call, since the carrier does not display an email address prominently
on its website (a common practice, to avoid being inundated with nuisance
emails), and snail mail would take too long.
How to begin?
The website has a page that shows where its cell phone towers
are. So does the federal watchdog. Across
the border, he also sees where the towers are located. This search has taken less than fifteen
minutes, but George has learned invaluable facts. The towers near where his “dead zones” occurred
are spaced far apart, there are several large factories nearby, and the nearest
tower is across a small lake. Near the
second tower is a large power substation.
He doesn’t know, for sure, if the factories and power station interfere
with the signals, but he has heard anecdotes about that. He does know that many radio-type signals are
seriously degraded when they pass over water.
He will use that information judiciously. He also sees that the towers across the
border are closer than the ones on his side.
That means that they could override his local signal strength. He is less angry now, knowing that there are
possible explanations.
George calls customer service. The automated answering service frustrates
him immeasurably, but he doesn’t let that displeasure cloud his focus.
The representative answers.
George needs to be aware that the contact person not only is not the
owner(s), but is likely not even in a position of authority. She is an employee, and any attack on her
would be unfsir. She is getting paid to
do a difficult job, and she is limited in how she can respond. Be fair and polite to her, regardless of the
outcome. Also establish that you
understand her position, and want to work with her to find a solution. This approach is more likely to win her to
your side, and secure her cooperation.
Don’t pontificate, use big words or talk down to the
employee. She deserves the same respect
that you do.
She examines your file, and explains that there have only
been “a few” complaints about dead zones.
You feel irritated, because you know that very few people who experience
these problems follow up with a complaint.
She also says that you must have been still in the other country when
you made the calls. Your first urge is
to blast her. But refrain. Instead, indicate that you understand that
she may not fully be aware of the infrastructure, and ask her if there is
someone to whom you can speak – a supervisor or techie – that can deal with
this. You have reached the limit of
problem solving with her. Note that many
companies authorize their CS people to reverse nominal charges, just to avoid
delays in the queue (e.g. bank charges).
She is not so authorized, and you move to the supervisor.
Here, you deal on a
more technical level. Supervisors always
are given greater authority. While she
may not be empowered to cancel your contract and refund your money, she will be
enabled to provide recompense, investigate matters further, and so on.
Begin by pointing out that the previous employee tried, but
had not been given enough power to deal with the complaint. Again, this is not the CEO or major shareholder
with whom you are dealing, so recognize limitations.
Ask, first, what the proper email and snail mail address
would be to provide a written, formal complaint. You may even ask who would be
the next point of contact if the two of you do not come to a satisfactory
agreement. While this will “set her
teeth on edge,” she also will see that you do not intend to let the matter go
unresolved. She will be more motivated
to keep the simmering complaint from reaching her superiors. Again, don’t be aggressive, and don’t insult. All that will occur if you do is that the CS
person will become defensive. Maybe
point out to her how tedious the complaint process sis, and empathize with her
about how that must make things more stressful for her.
Now, explain the tower locations, the research you have
done, and the history of other complaints (including other providers) made to
the watchdog. Point out that you are
experiencing these problems repeatedly, and that they are contrary to the good
service that you had been expecting from such a reputable firm. Indicate that you find formal complaints to
be time-consuming, and also suggest whatever reasonable solution you had
considered prior.
Let us assume that the matter is more complex: you have had
so many calls dropped that you have lost a client of your own, or something has
occurred that has incurred significant harm or damage to you. The harm is directly attributable to the
problem. It is unlikely that this
second-level employee with be able to resolve your complaint. Now, you must act more formally, and take it “to
a higher court.”
Of course, you have solid documentation regarding all of the
issues, don’t you? It is always
imperative that you write down or have proof of your position, in each matter.
You are going to use
a more aggressive tone in your first letter or email. Itemize your sequence of complaints to
date. Indicate some of the loss you have
incurred. Now, offer the first solution:
compare your complaint to others that have been resolved (either through court,
the watchdog, or privately).
Next, provide a synopsis of your legal rights, as you
understand them. Discuss how you
understand that the company needs to be profit-oriented and that it most likely
wants to provide good quality of service, but that they are allowing your
complaint to boil into something that is blown out of proportion. Then point out that, possibly to them, this
is a small matter, but to you, the costs and inconvenience have much more of an
impact on you. You need to show them that you are willing to see their point, but
that they need to see yours, too.
As in the contact with the supervisor, you need to establish
reasonableness, but firmness. Here, you
want them to know that there are steps you can take, short of a lawsuit or “going
public.” Make sure that they are aware
that you have further documentation, and the support of at least a few other
people with identical complaints. The
last thing (although you have not overtly threatened it) that the company wants
to see is even a discussion of a class-action suit!
One corporate client for whom I worked owned a shopping mall
with a common-area sidewalk. At least
once each year, someone would threaten to sue because he or she had slipped on
the ice (even though there was almost never any ice on the sidewalk!). Rather than go to court, the insurance
company would agree to a $200 or $300 settlement, knowing that they were in the
right but that legal fees to combat the case would cost ten or twenty times as
much is small claims court. It was
easier to avoid the conflict.
Similarly, the telephone carrier knows where that cut-off line is. Is it easier to provide a phone with a better
antenna or would it be easier to boost the signal on the tower? Obviously, the phone costs can be recouped,
and the bill adjusted.
Maybe your preferred solution is, indeed, a better phone, or
a cash rebate. Be aware of the reasonableness
of your suggested solutions. Maybe a
cash card that can be applied to future calls.
Your lost calls cost $40? Ask
for a $50 rebate, but be willing to
settle for $25. After all, some problems
are inherent in any technology. You are
more concerned about being able to resolve the matter that will obviously
reoccur? Ask for a dedicated contact
person that you can call when it happens, but be prepared for a compromise: the
carrier will flag your account so that the initial, low-level employee can
solve the matter instantly.
If you suggest reasonable solutions first, even if they are
not fully acceptable, you are more likely to get reasonable compromise in
return. In other words, use various
techniques to leverage a favourable response from the company. Don’t; get personal, but do have a plan. Show bona fide loss, but don’t exaggerate. Be prepared to be tenacious. But, be prepared to be fair.
