Subject:
|
Customer Service Desks (was Re: WalMart vs WalMart)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.shopping
|
Date:
|
Tue, 7 Dec 1999 22:40:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
377 times
|
| |
|
|
Christopher Lannan wrote:
>
> In lugnet.market.shopping, Ben Olmstead writes:
> > As for the demeanor of individual associates... at least where I am,
> > about 50% of people who ever get trained for the service desk are
> > *mean* to customers. (i.e., will, for example, make up rules which
> > deny the customer what they want) About 25% are nice, but won't bend
> > the rules to benefit a customer, and the last 25% actually go out of
> > their way to help customers. Management likes the last 25% best
> > (even though we cost the store more money _directly_, we make more
> > customers happy, thus they spend more money with us), at least where
> > I am. I don't know if this is a typical situation or not.
>
> I think that this is because there is really no reason for these folks
> to be nice. They are not entrepeneurs and really don't directly see a
> benefit when they are "nice" being nice usually means more work, and
> without a profit sharing program or something, that just means more
> money for "the Man"
I have to agree with you, but only halfway. There are two very
different situations which come up:
1) the customer is argumentative/angry
2) the customer is calm and reasonable, and is simply asking if we can
do something
In the first case, almost everybody has a hard time being nice, even
though (I've found) being nice actually makes everything easier.
However, it's a pretty basic response to yell back when someone yells at
you, so I understand it.
In the second case, most associates will tell the customer 'no, we
don't', even though it takes no extra time/effort to do whatever it is
that the customer is asking for, and from what I've seen, the motivation
is saving the store money. I think it's because service desk associates
don't see the store's direct monetary gain from what we do--we just make
people happy, which costs the store money *right now*, though those same
people then come back and spend more money with us, making up for it.
Again, this is only where I work--it could be very different elsewhere.
And to make this a little more Lego related (instead of just shopping
related), about 2/3 of the time when someone tries to return a Lego set,
they've opened the set, taken all of the pieces from the set out, and
replaced them with a few random Legos, just so the box will sound right
when shaken. (The other 1/3 of the time, the box is still sealed.)
This is especially a problem with the Star Wars sets. Of course, the
non-FOLs take these back half the time... (So take heed: buy all the
TIE/Y-Wing sets you can, take all the Vaders, and then return them!
Ditto with young Obi-Wans and Gungan Subs! Nevermind that it's fraud!
Mutter, mutter, mutter...)
> Chris -who doesn't agree with the attitude above, but understands it- > Lannan
Ben Olmstead/BEM
<bem@mad.scientist.com>
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: WalMart vs WalMart
|
| (...) I think that this is because there is really no reason for these folks to be nice. They are not entrepeneurs and really don't directly see a benefit when they are "nice" being nice usually means more work, and without a profit sharing program (...) (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.market.shopping)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
