‘You call that customer service?’ — Part two

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of commentary online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

In my Jan. 12 column “You call that customer service?” I suggested that a default on the social contract between corporate America and consumers might help explain the lack of empathy among some after the fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December.

Unsurprisingly, readers shared an abundance of their own experiences with modern-day customer service. These ranged from tales of poor training and elocution in call centers to specific examples like additional charges on a credit card even after it had been reported stolen. Outages among CenturyLink landlines garnered mentions. (For what it’s worth, the Minnesota Star Tribune stylebook used to insist on calling outages “failures.”)

Readers also mentioned perfunctory approaches to service that they find particularly galling:

The good along with the bad

One reader made a salient point that applies not just to this discussion but to any call for improvement: In addition to calling out what’s wrong, praise what’s right. The reader complimented TruStone Financial Credit Union and HealthPartners insurance member services. She noted “some similarities: locally based and member-owned nonprofits” and said she’d love to know about larger, profit-based companies with satisfying customer service.

There also were examples of things that ended well but only after much effort. A commentary we published Sunday (“A monopoly, 27 months and an employee who dug deeper”) spoke about trying to get CenterPoint Energy to update a bank account routing number. Separately, a correspondent wrote to me about a recent request from the Star Tribune for renewal that omitted key information about what it would entail. Fortunately for us, this was eventually resolved by “a very pleasant human being.”

Some people reported good experiences with companies others considered “awful.” HealthPartners was an example.

In my original column, I alluded to my experiences with eldercare. In one recent encounter, the outcome was bad but the experience was somehow … good? Or at least honest. This involved long term care insurance. The John Hancock representative explained the complicated system of invoicing from care providers and proof of payment required of me if my mother is to receive reimbursements on her claim, then told me — forthrightly — that the company would make no effort to remedy anything that didn’t pass muster. At least I know.

Another call for responses

While we’ve received a couple of commentary-length responses, including “The rise and fall of customer service,” (Jan. 19) and an upcoming piece that gets technical about bonuses and metrics, we haven’t yet heard from anyone currently in a position of authority at a big corporation. We’d like to. Minnesota has 17 companies in the Fortune 500 and many others of impact. I’d be interested in seeing whether they can explain their customer service strategies without resorting to spin. (Executives, please don’t feel goaded. The question is sincere and the concern, by all evidence, widely held.)

So you’ve said

One reader wrote of my column: “this article is a great way to think about an old problem.” Indeed, I’m a big fan of the notion that there’s little new under the sun. (The actual phrase from Ecclesiastes is “nothing new under the sun,” but as media veterans have learned the hard way, absolutes will always come back and bite you.)

I also believe that whatever I might broach in my writing, someone somewhere sometime has written something that can be applied to the discussion.

A recent letter writer recommended a 1970 essay by free-market economist Milton Friedman that “will reveal that the root cause of corporations’ feeble attempt to provide customer service is greed.” This article, “A Friedman doctrine — The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits,” is in the New York Times archive, behind a paywall, but with a little free-marketeering on Google you can find it elsewhere.

Pot, meet kettle

What I’m about to say does not negate what I’ve written about the structural disintegration of customer service, but it’s always good to remember that every person you might interact with is subject to their own circumstances.

I’m Exhibit A. I’ve been unable to respond to all the people who’ve written to me since my column appeared. That’s not exactly superb customer service, especially since my whole point was to stir the pot.

But I have an excuse: Since November, my ailing 94-year-old mother has been living with me. She’s on hospice status, and every indication is that her time is approaching. But as the hospice nurse told me Thursday morning, we die how we live, and my mom has always been strong-willed. (And how.)

Between that and the usual swirl of media work — which is always marching forward — I have to triage. (By the way, is voicemail the most inefficient communication tool ever devised?)

I do read and consider every correspondence I receive. In other words, your communication is important to me, even when it may not seem so.