Readers Write: Customer service decline, mega data centers

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

David Banks’ Jan. 12 column “You call that customer service?” struck a nerve with me. In the 21st century we seem to have the options of poor service, self-service or no service. Impenetrable automated phone systems, finicky self-service checkouts and prolonged waits on hold are the rule, not the exception. The best service providers are the congenial baristas at my favorite neighborhood bakeries. Among the worst are my former landline and internet service provider, whose diabolical phone system made it almost impossible to reach a human and whose humans I finally reached seemed clueless about my systems.

When I call my clinic to make an appointment, I make sure I have my computer solitaire open to while away my time on hold while I hear how important my call is. If Alexander Graham Bell tried to summon his assistant Watson today, he would get a message saying “The party you are trying to reach is away from his desk. Please leave a message or try again later.”

There are exceptions. My Medicare Advantage provider’s phone system connects me with a knowledgeable human promptly. My present internet service provider provides user-friendly web pages and phone systems. But these are oases in a desert of poor service organizations, who all seem to have one thing only in common — a survey asking me “How did we do?”

Donald Wolesky, Minneapolis

•••

Our youngest son worked about 10 years as a Best Buy Geek Squad service representative, working remotely and taking over customers’ computers. A new CFO from Arthur Andersen came in and outsourced all the jobs to the Philippines, as she had done in prior corporate gigs. Our middle son handled customer service for Bombas socks for several years and got downsized out of a job. He is on his second customer service job since then. He does a good job, but when bottom-line cuts happen, service jobs are the first to go.

Fred Grittner, St. Paul

•••

I tend to believe that bad customer service is a strategy of large monopoly-type businesses. Business opposition to the recent one-click-to-cancel regulation is an easy example. They would rather put you through their scripts and customer retention staff. Just last week, I was trying to save a dormant Comcast email address following a Comcast notification. Following online instructions, I was told to call for assistance, which led to an automated “tell us why you are calling” loop with human assistance seemingly impossible to access despite me saying “representative " and “human” multiple times. This led to me, ridiculously, yelling “HUMAN!” into the telephone multiple times before abandoning the call.

The next pathway was their chat system. I reached a possible human, though how would you know? I explained the situation and waited multiple minutes with an occasional “hello” from me and a “working on it” from Comcast. The end came suddenly with a “chat ended” message. After 30 minutes of effort, the results were higher blood pressure and my recognition that I did not really need that old email address. More generally, why would Comcast give me a specific phone number to call that does not lead to someone who can actually provide effective service?

Bill Coleman, Mahtomedi

•••

I just read Banks’ column in the Jan. 12 issue. It was good, as I can certainly relate to it. I would, however, encourage Banks and anyone else who read his article to Google “Doctrine of Shareholder Theory 1970 by economist Milton Friedman.”

It is an easy read. It will answer a lot of questions and frustrations brought up by Banks. The article, originally published in the New York Times, will reveal that the root cause of corporations’ feeble attempt to provide customer service is greed. Friedman’s epistle states that a corporation has no social responsibility. It must provide quality service to stockholders and owners first. The goal of a company is to maximize shareholder value. A goal to increase profits, to enrich a few corporate owners at the expense of the community. As said in the 1987 movie “Wall Street,” “Greed is good!”

With that said, how can companies justify spending money on “customer service?” That costs money. That takes away from the bottom line called “profit.”

Dennis J. Jarabek, Brainerd, Minn.

•••

I know this is small potatoes, but it’s irritating. The first thing that came to mind when I read Banks’ column was let’s dispense with the “please listen carefully as our options have changed.” Unless I’ve called 10 times in the past week, I don’t remember what the options were anyway, so just tell me! Then I can get on with telling them what I’m calling about.

Mary Ellen Cox, River Falls, Wis.

•••

Banks raises some thoughtful questions about customer service and asks for readers’ input, so I will share a few tips that I have found helpful. These are not things I have attempted with health insurance representatives specifically, but in other matters involving customer service.

I keep in mind that the person on the other end of the phone may be new at their job, or at least not the most experienced person in the organization. If the individual is unable to help with my issue, I might say in a nonjudgmental tone, “I understand that you are unable to help me. Is there someone else there who might be more experienced in this area who could help with this? Your supervisor, perhaps?”

This almost always elicits helpfulness. The person puts me on hold, goes away for a while, probably consulting with someone. They come back with a solution.

Another technique I use if a representative and I are not understanding each other and I sense we are both becoming frustrated, I “accidentally” cut myself off mid-sentence. When I call back, I get someone else with whom I often have better communication.

Third, if a customer service representative is being rude, abrupt and uncooperative, I might ask, in a curious tone, “Is there a reason that you are being so short with me? Should I call back later, or speak with someone else about my questions?” Again, this changes the dynamic, because I’ve indicated that, although I’m not willing to be treated rudely, I don’t mind waiting for better service, or talking with a different representative if need be.

Lisa Wersal, Vadnais Heights

Someone has apparently figured out that the average household has 21 devices connected to the internet (“Huge data centers hungry for power,” front page, Jan. 12). I guess my wife and I aren’t keeping up with the Joneses. You see, I have no idea whether, in the end, all these huge data centers and the devices they serve are good or bad for our future well-being, but I am a bit skeptical. Xcel even hinted that serving large industrial customers such as data centers might actually help hold down costs for the rest of us.

This got me thinking about how anxious we are to think that more efficient furnaces, toasters or cars will save us from fuel shortages and climate change, when the most obvious way to conserve and lower costs is to consume less energy. You know … a little less air conditioning, fewer miles driven and less data crunched. Efficiency is good, but a little less consumption might also help.

J Fonkert, Roseville

•••

Regarding the mega data centers coming to Minnesota: Heck, build ‘em in Antarctica! With six months of continuous daylight, it’d be a great place for solar. And with wind speeds up to 100 mph, wind could easily pick up the slack for the other half of the year. Considering an average temperature of around -70 Fahrenheit in the interior, cooling shouldn’t be too much of a problem. Let’s go!

Gordon Abel, Minneapolis