Tag Archives: Customer service

Critics Vs. Trolls

Any of us who work in and around marketing understand that to a large extent consumers control our brands these days.

Troll in Trondheim

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ask any company that’s run into difficulty with its image due to a social media faux pas or to some bad consumer experience that’s gone viral and they’ll tell you.  I think that brands lay the groundwork – they shape the experience but ultimately consumers are the ones who refine that groundwork into the image the world at large has of a brand.

Given that, and given the need for brands to participate in the social world, they’re going to encounter people who have had either a less than optimal interaction with the brand or who just don’t like whatever it is that the brand is selling/doing.  Those people might use the social tools to let the world know about it since as we know it’s the less happy people who tend to lead brand discussions and not usually the staunch brand advocates (until they’re prompted somehow).  I think it’s important that the recipients of the criticism differentiate between the two main types of people who offer it up:  critics and trolls.  They need to be dealt with differently.

Critics tend to express their displeasure in a thought-out, rational way.  They usually have facts at their disposal and will listen both to other facts and promises to rectify whatever it is that irked them in the first place.  Think of a restaurant review – maybe they just didn’t like the food – that’s opinion.  Or maybe the food arrived cold and slowly – those are facts and problems which can be fixed.  Critics help brands make themselves better.

Trolls, on the other hand, tend to be deliberately inflammatory.  They are not trying to help fix anything – they just want people to respond, start flame wars, and get their jollies this way.  They usually lack facts, they usually direct personal attacks as part of their rants, and harassment and stupidity are the cesspools in which they live.

What does one do?  As we said the other day, you must respond to them both.  Don’t do so by attacking them.  Get your facts straight, point out opinions (which you respect) from facts, and accept that the critics might help you get better.  Trolls go away when no one takes their bait.  Good critics acknowledge improvement and it’s fair to reach out to them once you’ve fixed whatever was wrong.  Our constant focus on the customer means we need to allow them to help us get better even as we continue to shape the brand we want them to see.

Make sense?

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, digital media, Uncategorized

The Ostrich Strategy

We’ve all heard the myth that ostriches bury their heads in the sand, particularly when they’re frightened.  It’s not true (hence a myth) – they’re probably turning some eggs they’ve laid.  We used to have a dog – a bulldog! – that would sort of do the same thing when he was scared or had done something bad.  He would turn his head away from you  – we were 100% sure he believed he was invisible: since he can’t see you, you can’t see him.

Many brands seem to be following a similar strategy when it comes to social media and customer complaints.  A few years ago, Bain Consulting conducted a study that  discovered that while 80% of companies believe they deliver ‘superior’ customer experiences to their customers, just 8% of customers agree.  Who is kidding themselves here?

It’s not an occasional problem.  Another study – this one by Social Media Marketing University – showed that 58.2% of brands receive customer complaints via social media ‘occasionally.’ 10.9%receive them ‘somewhat often’ while 4.9% receive them ‘very often.’  So what do they do, given that surveys reported in news media found that customers expect a response to a complaint posted on a brand’s social media account within one hour?  They pretend they’re invisible.  Is that a bad thing?  You tell me:

  • 58.2% of brands receive customer complaints via social media ‘occasionally.’ 10.9 percent receive them ‘somewhat often’ while 4.9% receive them ‘very often.’
  •  26.1%  of brands reputations have been tarnished as a result of negative social media posts; 15.2% lost customers and 11.4% lost revenue.

And here is the kicker:

  • 23.4% of brands not only do not have a strategy in place to manage negative social commentary, but do not have plans to develop one. 24.5% of brands are in the process of developing a strategy and 7.6% have strategies in place that are currently proving to be ineffective.

This isn’t the only survey that found businesses lacking.  Another one which comes from Sprinklr shows that 20% of companies rarely, if ever, respond to customer complaints made via social. The “ostrich strategy” is about the worst choice a business can make.  Putting your head in the sand doesn’t make the issues go away – it just makes it harder for you to hear them as they get louder and louder.  That’s my take.  Yours?

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, digital media

We Need Smarter Social Thinking

Sometimes it feels as if it’s one step forward and two steps back with respect to marketers and social media.

English: Southwest Airlines 737-300 N310SW. I ...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The latest example of this comes from a company that generally has a consumer friendly reputation, Southwest Airlines.  I’m willing to cut the home office a little slack in the tale of woe I am about to relate.  But only a little.

Southwest, like every airline, has a top tier of frequent passengers.  These are generally heavy business travelers and are the ones any airline executive will tell you really pay the bills since they’re often flying full fare and doing so frequently.  They receive perks, and in Southwest’s case one of them is priority boarding.

One of their “A-list” flyers was traveling from Denver with his young children (ages 6 and 9) and wasn’t allowed to board early because they don’t have VIP status.  We can debate if that was a mistake by the gate agent or bad corporate policy but what happened next is really the point.  He told the agent ‘Real nice way to treat an A-list. I’ll be sure to tweet about it,’” according to  WCCO.  He went on to do just that.  According to him, it was “Something to the effect of, ‘Wow, rudest agent in Denver. Kimberly S, gate C39, not happy @SWA.’”  Here is where things get interesting and, from a social marketing perspective, just silly.

Southwest’s social crew does a great job listening.  As an aside, they thanked this same traveler for a nice tweet about an agent a month ago.  They saw the tweet and must have called the gate agent about the unhappy customer.  The agent proceeded to remove the man from the plane (upsetting the children) and to demand that he delete the tweet to be allowed to travel.  He did so and according to all involved there was no bad language and threats made by him.  The agent did threaten to call the cops.

Since this incident (for which Southwest has apologized to the traveler) there have been TV stories, newspaper articles, and many screeds such as this.  The guy kept tweeting about it too.  Southwest offered the guy three $50 travel vouchers.  He has said he’ll never fly them again.  So much for an A-list passenger’s business.  I suspect the social crew at Southwest didn’t intend for the agent to take the action she did but someone should have thought about that being a possibility.  I mean you call someone up and say they pissed off a top status passenger and now it’s on Southwest’s “permanent record” and what do you expect?

As marketers we need to have thicker skins when we’re in the social stream.  If you were speaking with a number of business partners and one said something a bit off-putting, you’d probably make a mental note and let it go.  At worst you’d say something privately later.  This just threw gasoline on an already lit fire.  That fire has gotten brighter as it gets more oxygen from all that’s being written about the incident.  It’s hard enough to develop an A-list customer.  Retaining them should always be a top priority, maybe even if it means bending the rules (like expanding priority boarding to kids under 18) from time to time.

Thoughts?

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, Huh?