I’ve done some work with some folks in the software as a service (SaaS) space and have lots of colleagues and friends who are also working there. Whenever I talk with them about Customer Experience, I always chuckle when the conversation turns to the Voice of the Customer. (more…)
Where a CX function is located within a company is a frequent discussion topic among CXers. I’ve been thinking about this recently and, while obviously each company is unique and every situation different, it occurs to me that where a CX function resides isn’t nearly as important as is what it’s chartered to do.
But if I could get all Simon Sinek-y here, naturally the greater question still, is the Why. Let’s look at the charter of what your CX organization should be in the first place, then we can start to look at what difference it may make as to where it’s located. The why should drive the what, and therefore, the where will really just be a slight tweaking and refinement of range of influence. (more…)
I just got off the phone with a colleague and we were having a conversation about data. He brought up some good questions and points and so I figured I’d jot a few of them down here before they went right out of my head again.
The gist of the discussion was the difference between quantitative and qualitative data. He was having some trouble explaining the difference to his boss. One line of questioning I asked right off the top was, “Why is this a controversy? Why the heck does this even matter? How did this become a topic of conversation?” It’s always useful to get to the bottom of why someone is asking a question so as to better address it in the first place. Plus, this seems more like an academic inquiry rather than something that’ll actually make a huge difference in what they’re doing.
It is, however, pertinent in a discussion like this, because I’ve used the mechanism that quantitative data can tell us where to look, while qualitative data can tell us what to do once we get there. More on that in a moment. (more…)
I’ve noticed that, when I write about CX or speak with other CX professionals, I often tend to append my anecdotes about my own experiences with something like, “Well, now, this wasn’t a huge deal, but…” or, “Of course, it’s not the end of the world, but…” I see many other CX leaders do the same thing. I’ve written before about how CXers can be the best and the worst Customers because, while we’re sympathetic to those with whom we interact, being in the business we’re also pretty demanding from those who should know better; we recognize and call missteps out when we see them. (more…)
I used to work out at a gym that had a bothersome, but almost comedic tendency: Whenever a piece of equipment broke down, someone would diligently and swiftly mark it with an “Out of Order” sign. The particular machine would usually sit like that (broken, that is) for weeks on end. Now, part of this is the result of compartmentalized work: The person whose job it was to properly label broken machinery literally is done with his job once that sign is in place…it’s someone else whose responsibility it is to fix it. But you almost got the sense through the entire club that that’s all that was necessary when something went wrong: label it as broken, and move on. (more…)
Improving our processes is hard work. There’s a lot of research and thinking that goes into the exercise of getting better at what we do. Add to that the complexities and politics of change management—especially if your organization is large and/or well-established—and it can be daunting for sure. People spend careers refining their approach to Process Engineering, and quite frankly, if it’s being done right, there’s a lot of math involved. And as any one of my cadets can tell you…math is hard.
One thing that (unnecessarily, in my opinion) makes it even more of a challenge is the wrong perspective. I consider it unnecessary because it’s a human tendency, but not an inevitability, to see things from our own perspective and miss those of others. (more…)
Let me be scandalous for a second here (okay, it’s not nearly as scandalous as I sometimes get in real life, but bear with me):
Stop looking at your scores. Just stop. (more…)
I’m blessed to have been recruited to work in the field of Customer Experience. I came to the practice of CX via Process Engineering (Lean Six Sigma, or LSS). Using PE to better our CX is an incredibly fulfilling use of a legacy approach to improving what we do. Years ago, before I was involved in CX, I saw how, sadly, PE was often used to ‘find efficiencies’, which usually meant looking for redundancies and people to fire. Back in the day, I mortified my then-boss when I posted the following article to my professional network about why that’s a bad idea. Somehow it didn’t get me in trouble (too much). I recently re-read it, gave it some buffing, and present it to you here today. Plenty of organizations still use PE organically simply to reduce resource use and eliminate waste in their business processes; a noble endeavor as well. Regrettably, the trend still exists to cut people as a spoil of those improvements. For those who aren’t yet using PE for CX purposes, perhaps this can still resonate with you. Enjoy.
One of the things my colleagues and I emphasize when we educate our partners about Lean Six Sigma and Continuous Improvement is that it shouldn’t be used to reduce headcount. Some managers and executives I train think that new-found capacity after a process improvement is made is a good opportunity to draw down. Here are two important reasons why that’s a very bad idea: (more…)
Been There. Done That. Now get the t-shirt!
Industry