There’s a meme going around LinkedIn these days about a job posting that requires of the ideal candidate experience that’s physically impossible: a history of use of a platform or programming language that’s longer than the language’s existence in the first place. There’s even been a mocking job posting put up with a cascade of similar impossibilities as requirements.
But that led me to thinking: As I’ve written about before, I sometimes browse through job postings on LinkedIn and Glassdoor in the CX field. What I mentioned in that previous post was how disparate the actual jobs are that are all listed as “CX” in some way or another. But the joke about a job requirement for experience that’s literally impossible to have acquired set off a bell in my mind that reminded me of another thing a lot of these CX job postings have in common: They almost universally require extensive experience in the hiring company’s industry. […]
I’m a big fan, as you know, of negative feedback. I suggest that CX professionals be greedy for negative feedback. Since slaps on the back and hoorahs from your most ardent fans don’t really help you improve, you should be eager to hear “suggestions” from your Customers as to how you can better serve them. Fortunately, there’s rarely a shortage of such inputs. So what do you do with this feedback? There are three ways in which you should be using every negative piece of information you receive from your Customers, regardless of the method of transmission: […]
There are articles all over the place and books overloading shelves in the business section of the stores having to do with strategies and branding. One of the theories that I find appealing is that, when it comes to strategies and visions and missions, it’s important to leave your products or services out of these guiding statements altogether. A company that determines its goodness or place in the lives of its Customers based simply on what they produce or do is missing a bigger piece of the puzzle: Why a Customer should care in the first place.
It has repercussions on the ground: If you make men’s shoes, that’s great. But your brand and your vision should likely be more than simply, “we make good/great shoes.” One reason for this is if the maker of “good/great shoes” were to go out of business tomorrow, a competitor would simply come in and buy up whatever is left of value—be it the supply chain, the raw materials, the cobblers (or elves?), the brand logo—and run on with whatever they’d been doing all along regardless of any greater purpose the recently out-of-business company may have had. In short, the erstwhile shoe maker wouldn’t be missed. […]
Steve DiGioia asks a great question about your Customer-facing team members’ words, but it can be representative of a more deep-seated issue: Your culture!
Steve, great question… Sometimes you need to coach, and sometimes you need to take a look at your culture: Is it compassion-based, or compliance-based? https://t.co/fweEXrZikq pic.twitter.com/rNrDtx6B5y
— Nicholas Zeisler, CCXP, LSSBB, CSM (@NicholasZeisler) August 28, 2020
We sometimes have an officious way of dealing with our Customers, almost as though they’re the problem that we have to deal with. As Customers ourselves, we witness this all the time, and surely as CX professionals and leaders we’re also more aware of it when we see it. It’s interesting, then, that it ever happens in the first place, considering the positions we hold and the authority we wield.
For instance, if you wanted to come up with the worst thing you can ever say to your Customer, you’d be hard pressed to beat: “Your ticket has been closed” when the issue hasn’t been resolved. And yet, don’t we get that all the time?
I recently had a minor issue with a product and went online to submit a question about it. I receive two emails three days later in rapid succession: […]