Opinion: Telcos talk nonsense on customer service

 

Customer service won't improve until telcos acknowledge the problem.

Everybody agrees that telcos too often fail to offer customers a good experience, except the telcos. David Havyatt asks whether we can ever expect them to change.

The telecommunications industry is braced for the release of two important documents in May – both of which deal with whether there is a requirement for greater regulation to ensure better outcomes for consumers.

First there is the release of the report on the Reconnecting the Customer inquiry by telecommunications regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), which is likely to make recommendations on what needs to be done to clean up the industry. 

The second is the release for public comment of the revised Telecommunications Consumer Protection Code by Communications Alliance. 

As revealed exclusively in iTnews, this code is expected to place new restrictions on the way products and services are promoted and new compliance requirements on industry.

The depressing part of recent telco and industry submissions to the ACMA inquiry and the Government’s review of the TIO scheme has been the presumption that there really isn’t a problem. Australia's telcos attribute growing numbers of  complaints down to statistics gathering, complexity or strategic customers.

From where the telcos sit, they all compete on customer service, and competition will improve it.

Independent observers dismiss this as nonsense.

David Jaffe, Consulting Director from LimeBridge Australia, told the recent IQPC Customer Experience Event that “the whole way telcos think about product is customer hostile”. 

David Howarth from CHOICE took a similar view when he made a presentation to the public hearing for the ACMA’s Reconnecting the Customer inquiry. 

Telcos make it impossible for consumers to understand offers, he said.

Howarth labelled telco language “Orwellian”, based on the concept of DOUBLETHINK in Nineteen Eighty-Four. He demonstrated that the term “Unlimited Caps” met the definition just as well as Orwell’s BLACKWHITE. 

He concluded:

The genius of the term “unlimited cap” is that it reveals nothing about whether the plan is good or bad and it takes full advantage of the hollowing of language which means that the representations are now so content-less that consumers are denied any information whether misleading or not. 

The leaked report of the new TPC Code suggested the industry is going to outlaw the use of the word “cap” unless the plan really has a hard cap. With that challenge out of the way, the question is how the Code will deal with the next piece of language gymnastics from telcos.

The practice is well entrenched. As far back as 1990, Telecom Australia was scolded in a report by the Communications Research Institute of Australia (CRIA) on A New Language for Telecom concluded that Telespeak was a sub-language but that it was “not readily understood”, noting: 

“The current Telespeak is a melee of ordinary language, technical terms, pseudo-technologisms and acronyms.  The language is not widely shared, not easily understood nor easy to use.”

Searching for solutions

Those in the industry hopeful of staving off more regulation - and those with foresight into what an NBN world might look like - claim to be investing energy in what marketers call ‘Customer Experience Management’.  

The recent IQPC Customer Experience Event gave some insights into the state of play.

The first observation: no one can agree on what to measure when it comes to customer experience.

There are three ways to measure what customers think of you – attitudes (e.g. customer satisfaction surveys), behavioural intention (e.g. Net Promoter Score, how likely are customers to recommend you) and actual behaviour (e.g. churn, complaints to external bodies). There was some heated argument as to which metric mattered. (I would note that the only one changing is the latter - complaints to the TIO keep growing).

Second, while everybody agreed that improved customer service makes good business sense, most companies found it hard to make a quantified business case for improvements.

For some, providing a better customer experience is about organisational culture and empowering the front line staff. For others it is all about processes and mapping the customer’s journey through various touchpoints. 

Nowhere is the confusion in customer experience management more evident than in dealing with “social media”. 

Everyone in the industry has a different theory on how to engage.

Telstra’s Jules Scarlett said social media is monitored by the telco's traditional media relations team, while Lachlan Burns from Primus said social media was handled by the “traditional correspondence” team. Health insurer BUPA meanwhile regards social media as the province of the e-commerce team in marketing.

Nigel Dews from Vodafone earlier in the year noted that “the company had originally approached social media as another means of selling; however, now the company had taken the approach of "service first rather than selling first".

To my surprise, it was Gary Wheelhouse from Harvey Norman who really showed how it should be done. For a firm better noted for its antagonism to the online world, he presented a picture of a retailer very active in both staking their presence in social media, and reacting to it. 

His two messages were that it was better to leave a negative comment up and show how you’ve reacted to turn it around than to delete the comment, and that the key was a fast response. 

He gave an example of ringing a store to get a sales assistant to approach a customer who had just made a Facebook comment about not being served.

We have started to see telcos take this approach and it is a small step in the right direction.

A forecast

The ACMA report will likely recommend a closer monitoring of telcos and again threaten more direct regulation if things don’t improve. 

The Communications Alliance code will probably fix many of the things that are currently broken, but not slow the inventiveness of telcos to make products “customer hostile”.

What the telcos regard as differentiation, their customers increasingly find is merely obfuscation. Customer perceptions will continue to decline until telcos acknowledge the concerns of their customers and are prepared to act differently. 

Otherwise they just fulfil the definition of insanity – doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result.

Do you have any suggestions for how telcos could lift their game?

Copyright © iTnews.com.au . All rights reserved.


Opinion: Telcos talk nonsense on customer service
David Havyatt.
"Thanks @anonymous. Both are points that came to mind to me too. @asmith I'm not exactly sure why you think my prior gigs working for telcos should make me therefore over critical of them. One ..."
By David Havyatt
 
 
 
Comments: 11
grump3
Apr 29, 2011 1:39 PM
Dodo appears to be trying to lift their game.
Just recently I posted my gripe on Whirlpool after running into a brick wall with Dodo's customer service regarding a problem with my broadband.
To my surprise, within an hour two of their reps (who apparently constantly monitor this site) had replied to my post, offered assistance & promptly resolved the issue to my satisfaction.

A pleasant change from my past experiences as an ex-Optus customer after their Customer Service lied to me in regard to their 'Bait & Switch plans!
asmith
Apr 29, 2011 3:04 PM
The author of this article knows full well that the numbers reported by the TIO are fictitious and the number of real actual complaints that have any investigation by the TIO is less than 20,000 per annum. Using these numbers to justify the position is a very shaky foundation.

This has been picked up by almost every submission regarding the TIO and ACMA inquiries and also by independent academic research.

Yet for reasons unbeknown to the public but well acquainted within the Telecommunications industry, Mr Havyatt continue to bag Telcos without supporting evidence or true cause.

The new CA code will make things worse for consumers. Amongst many other things, it proposes no service delivery during cooling off periods, etc.

Do you think people want to wait 21 days for their DSL service to be connected?

Come on David, there's two sides to this story, and you know it. The populist route of Telco bashing is wearing thin.


anonymous
Apr 29, 2011 3:44 PM

@asmith, the tenor of your comments sounds all too familiar. Apparently it's all the customers' fault, or the TIO's fault, or the government's fault. . .

Until you and the other similarly sourced industry representatives can move on from your fixed denial of any fault on the part of service providers, it seems the only way to provide some balance is to have a statutory complaint handling and investigation system, including provision for appropriate penalties, imposed by the government.

Incredibly, it now seems that may be the only way that some telcos can be made to accept and act on their responsibilities to their customers.
David Havyatt
Apr 29, 2011 3:47 PM
I never can resist an invitation to engage.

In the article I noted "Australia's telcos attribute growing numbers of complaints down to statistics gathering, complexity or strategic customers." So I think I stated the contested nature of those stats.

I'm happy to share my own analysis of the complaint stats which relates complaints (not issues) to the total number of services (which have been growing - I even allow an increase in telephony for VoIP) which showed the complaint numbers per service grew every year till last year. The problem is the stats so far this year show growth again.

Whether a complaint has any "investigation" by the TIO is irrelevant - as that is not really the standard by which to make the assessment. I would readily concede the concern by many in the industry that an increasing number of complaints have not been validated to determine whether the customer really did try to resolve with their supplier first. But here I'm bemused because telcos, especially the big three ultimately are responsible for the administration of the scheme. If they don't like it - work with consumers to fix it.

If the telcos really wanted to convince us they would jointly sponsor quality research into each of the three measures - attitudes, intention and action - and publish them in aggregate and use the data privately. Or even use it to validly build their brand positions.

But they don't.

I am further bemused by "Yet for reasons unbeknown to the public but well acquainted within the Telecommunications industry, Mr Havyatt continue to bag Telcos without supporting evidence or true cause." If the author wants to e-mail me what these "reasons unbenown to the public but well known to the industry" are I'll be happy to respond.

I'd just like to note that I've written about fifteen columns fot itNews - of those this is the only one I think that has simply "bagged" telco customer service. Certainly I've been critical of the way mobile phones are priced - but heck the NZ and Aus Governments have announced an investigation into mobile roaming, ACCAN has a super-complaint about calls to freephone and local rate numbers and the ACCC is starting its new inquiry into MTAS - three of the four big pricing issues.

I can't make any comment on the actual code - it hasn't been released for public comment.

anonymous
Apr 29, 2011 6:20 PM

@David Havyatt

+1
Paul K
May 1, 2011 8:59 AM
You can argue the difference between "real actual complaints" and the number that is reported till the cows come in.

There is a lot of talk about giving great customer service, but the sad fact is that most people have a poor experience at some point. Some people an incredibly dismaying one, even if it doesn't come to a TIO report.

Do their marketing departments think it's funny to name a plan in glowing term, and push it as being the bees knees, yet have fine print that makes it worthless?

If i get $300 of calls for $30 why does the next $300 worth cost $300?

If i get 1 gig of data for $30 on a plan, why will the next gig cost $100?

Paying huge amounts more for the 2nd or 3rd incriment of a product is contrary to all reason and customers expectation of general sales. When I buy an apple for $1.5 do I expect to pay $40 for the next 5 apples?

Why do we need to constantly ring to get our plans to work correctly, with promised bonus' given? Free installations that are free, yet the customer is charged until they complain.

The list goes on...
funkyg
May 2, 2011 10:01 AM
Although I agree that some people are getting better experiences using social media help, the truth of this is that this is more of the same, keeping a vocal minority quiet! This gives the perception of great customer service but hides any problems from people that don't use social media for these purposes (read here a vast majority).

I guess that the argument will be that a huge proportion of the Australian public are on Facebook, but only a few will use it this way.

To see this in action look at bofa_help on twitter. You will see that a high proportion of mentions are from people complaining about there poor phone service. If that is the case with twitter users just imagine the number that just take the poor service and complain to their 'real' friends.

Telco social media service is the same. To a large extent it just covers the real issue by catering to this particular market and gives the industry some very positive numbers showing improvement. Sadly those numbers aren't representative of the real problem, although it does prevent a huge groundswell against them.
walteradamson
May 2, 2011 11:38 AM
@funkyg, good comment. Which is why the concept of "social business" is worlds apart from simply using some social media tools in an outlying section of the business.

Social business requires thinking through customer engagement from the outside in. That's a tough job.

Walter @adamson
asmith
May 3, 2011 11:32 PM
Determining the nature of the complaint is paramount before you slam the industry with the number of complaints. According to the TIO, a complaint can be 'I don't like the colour of their website', 'They changed their name and I don't like it', 'I am happy with my service but I want it to be cheaper'.

The TIO has accepted all such similar complaints. Don't believe me? Think up the most ridiculous thing you can and call the TIO to make a complaint. They'll accept it guaranteed. Why? They make $31 out of it. That's around $5M in revenue based on last year's statistics alone.

Would you be content to brandish someone a rapist without them first being convicted by a competent court? It's an extreme analogy, but it's apt.

The TIO actually investigated less than 20,000 complaints last year and its likely that in excess of 60% of those were not found in the consumers favour if the previous years statistics are anything to go by.

So out of the tens of millions of telecommunication services, the telcos got about 10,000 of them wrong. Not a bad batting average when you consider most of those were Telstra's mistakes.

The author ought to come clean and disclose in his 'opinion' pieces that he used to be a Director of the TIO between 2001 - 2003 and spent all of his working life at telecommunications carriers before starting his new career.

At least then readers might be able to consider their own view on what might form and colour your opinions and from what experience you draw upon to make them.
anonymous
May 4, 2011 11:23 AM

@asmith (Andrew?), hopefully you might have realised by now that comparing consumer complaints about telcos with rape was neither smart nor appropriate. And as for "...brandish someone a rapist..."???

You say that David Havyatt is a former director of the TIO, in which case he may know more about it's operation than appears to be the case with your assertions.
David Havyatt
May 6, 2011 10:51 AM
Thanks @anonymous. Both are points that came to mind to me too.

@asmith I'm not exactly sure why you think my prior gigs working for telcos should make me therefore over critical of them. One thing about me though is that my name does happen to be a "unique identifier". There is only one David Havyatt on the planet. So all these "facts" about me can be discovered by Googling me and reading my Linked in profile or the CV on my website. (much less research than is required to understand a telco offer?)

These don't reveal that my first jobs in Telecom Australia were in Customer Service, both handling bill enquiries and resolving complaints about metered calls (before itemisation) and non-delivery of telegrams.

The other concerns about the TIO are weird. The CEO of the scheme has his KPIs set by the Board and Council. The former is majority staffed by industry reps, the latter by half industry reps. I don't think revenue maximisation has ever been in the KPIs of the Ombudsman.

I absolutely agree that there is a fault in the scheme that there is no basis for filtering out complaints that shouldn't be accepted. What I haven't seen is any evidence that industry - especially the big three that dominate the industry representation - have made any effort to get meaningful review of procedures.

The Optus submission to the DBCDE inquiry bemoans the fact that inquiry paid no attention to the TIOs own independent review. It may have helped if the TIO had bothered to tell its own members of that review - which it didn't.

The Telstra submission does talk a lot about the TIO's processes and does state that the views are "know to the TIO". But once again there just doesn't seem to be evidence of taking accountability for getting the scheme to work better.

VHA refreshingly endorses the unitary governance model. They go on that the governance reform should be sufficient to change the procceses. In doing so they seem to suggest that the consumer appointed council members are the source of all problems.

Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Australian miners send drones to work
In-depth: Unmanned aerial vehicles in the resources sector.
 
The New Zealand telco problem
Opinion: Could Telstra save Kiwi telcos?
 
IT price probe to 'name and shame' gougers
Industry ducking the issue, committee claims.
 
David Havyatt.
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Should the Government enact new legislation to protect copyright holders in the digital age?

   |   View results
Yes
  19%
 
No
  81%
TOTAL VOTES: 510

Vote