Where do customer service problems start and end? In recent months, both Radar and the Consumers' Association have each warned about companies such as Woneninterieur.nl, VanMoof, Beddenplein, Refurbished.nl, Temu and Emma. Sometimes the company in question collapsed afterwards.

Is bankruptcy the result of poor and inaccessible customer service or of the warnings from the Consumers' Association or Radar? Or does such a bankruptcy arise because these watchdogs send out a press release and 'the media' then publish it? Digital bank bunq also received a lot of attention. That company has a '24×7 SOS Hotline' with only a answering machine.

Not everything that provides poor service immediately goes bankrupt. I think for a moment of the troubled Waternet. I haven't lived in Amsterdam for three years, but every day I expect another convulsion from their shaky financial systems. I hope for the sake of the people of Amsterdam that the drinking water company is now accessible.

The cause and effect of problems in the contact center can sometimes be determined in advance. When I read the news about it British energy company Npower, I thought: that's definitely not going uphill.

But in other cases it is more difficult to determine what exactly are cause and effect. Staff turnover and image of the field of customer contact (the latter now seems to have been tabooed, 'we talk ourselves into the hole') is also one of them. High turnover causes higher costs and increases the chance of loss of quality and dissatisfied customers. But did it start with dissatisfied customers or did it start with poor management? And that image, is it a consequence of the Calimero syndrome or the cause of it?

Management is always to blame

W. Edwards Deming. Image: The W. Edwards Deming Institute

According to W. Edwards Deming, an American statistician and management consultant, 'Management is always to blame' for organizations and their problems. That rule sounds too simple to be true, but if you recognize it, you can tackle and prevent problems with it. After all, much depends on choices made by people with decision-making power. If you make a decision, also take responsibility for the impact it may have, for example on the customer contact area.

Those who prefer not to look at the (top) management (or the shareholders) can possibly get by with the tips that ChatGPT4o gave me. The omniscient chatbot indicated that cause/effect discussions often arise as a result of unclear definitions. Sometimes defining the context ('making it specific') also helps to analyze the problem. 'Take a step back and look at the bigger picture' seemed like very good advice from ChatGPT.

Productive dialogue

It can also be the other way around: good service leads to positive messages.

Also a hilarious tip from our collective online brain: 'Try to rephrase the question in a way that does not lead to circular reasoning'. And finally, ChatGPT4o offered some advice: “By using a combination of the above strategies, you can often free yourself from a cause/effect discussion and achieve a more constructive and productive dialogue.”

The latter is a surprisingly good idea. Fortunately, that dialogue is taking place here on Ziptone and on other platforms. (Ziptone/Erik Bouwer)

Interesting article? Share it!