When Being Big Enough Isn’t Enough: The Case for Using Econometric Models in Service Market Planning

Assessing market demand is critical for making optimal decisions with respect to investment and resource allocation.

As Field Service Organizations (FSOs) strive to build and grow profitable businesses, they must develop and implement strategies based on valid and reliable market research.   Assessing market demand is critical for making optimal decisions with respect to investment and resource allocation.  For example, it might be important to know the size and growth rate of a market segment prior to building a marketing strategy, establishing a division, or developing a service offering for it.  If the market segment is large and growing rapidly then a more aggressive investment may be warranted. Taking a more conservative approach could lead to a miscalculated decision that results in a significant loss or failure for the company.

While obtaining a granular level of data on the size and growth rate of a market segment can help service executives make better decisions and ensure better results, it is surprising that many do not attempt to obtain this level of insight.  Instead, service executives often rely on gut instinct or settle on an order of magnitude, given some related indicator.  For example, we often hear service executives claim that the service market must be big because the sales of the product are so high.  In other words, its “big enough” to warrant an investment.    

The problem with this type of market analysis is that it assumes that 100% of people who have bought a product will also purchase the service. It also does not take account the size of the installed base, competitive issues, or other constraints or factors influencing demand such at technology trends, economic trends, or market trends.  More importantly,  it does not provide any hard data into the size of the market or its growth rate. 

While surveys and secondary research have merit when it comes to market sizing and forecast, they too have their shortcomings.  Surveys and secondary research can of course provide insight into size and growth of a market as well as answer questions with respect to who buys, what do they buy, and factors influencing supply and demand.  However, they do not actually measure the actual size and growth of the Total Available Market (TAM) for the service under consideration.  In addition, a shortcoming of secondary research that we hear often is that it is not specific enough or tailored in its the perspective. Questions about the research methodology may also arise when the source is an industry analyst. 

Ultimately, a good TAM analysis is one that takes into account the size and growth rate of the installed base as well as the serviceable value of the installed base along with its anticipated growth rate.  We have found econometric market models to be very effective methods for conducting this type of service market analysis.  A good econometric model considers several data points related to buyers and products including but not limited to the number and types of buying organizations, equipment penetration rates (i.e., shipments), population density, and replacement rates.  These factors help in determining the size and value of the installed base while surveys and secondary research provides data points (e.g., price points, average spend, etc.) necessary for determining current and projected revenues and/or expenditures for a given service.     

Building an econometric model to determine the size and forecast of the TAM for services may seem like a lot of work. However, the efforts are worth it and can prevent a company from making serious mistakes and/or miscalculations about their market opportunity.  Several years ago, a client of mine gave a presentation at an industry conference where his competitors were present.  The presentation showed that his service business was growing twice as fast as the market. Although he had commissioned our firm to build a TAM model, he chose to compare his company’s revenue growth to market size data from an industry analyst’s report (i.e., secondary research). This analyst provide a market size estimate and forecast that was more conservative than ours. After the presentation, I asked my client why he didn’t present our data.  “We based our investment and resource allocation decisions on your model not the secondary research. We want to keep this fact a secret from our competitors as long as we can” was his reply.  Had his company relied only on secondary data they would have had different results.   His answer provided that his investment in building the market model was well worth it.   

Want to learn more about Econometric Models? 

Schedule a Free Consultation Today!

The Secret to Selling More Service Contracts

This article first appeared in Field Service News on May 28, 2018

Field service executives often face challenges when it comes to generating additional service revenue for their companies.

They often face resistance from customers as evidenced by low contract attachment rates. The natural tendency is to blame the price as the reasons why customers aren’t purchasing more services contracts.

After all, this is the feedback they received from their sales teams and from the customers.

Being logical and rational business people, field service executives try to solve the problem by lowering the price, after all, if the customer says that the price is too high, it must be the reason why they are not buying, right?

To quote, the popular song by George and Ira Gershwin, “It ain’t necessarily so!”. While price may be a factor in the purchase decision, seldom is price the only reason why customers don’t purchase service contracts.

In market research studies that I have conducted for clients in a wide array of technology service markets, I have found that price is often low on the list of criteria that end-users consider when selecting and evaluating service providers. Criteria such as quality of service, knowledge and skill of service personnel, breadth of service offering, and vendor’s knowledge of their business are perceived by customers to have higher importance than price alone.

The truth is “your price is too high” will always be an objection that customers provide when they cannot justify the value of a service contract.

This is because they have no way of logically defending the value of the service being purchased. Stated another way; they are not able to differentiate the benefits of service contracts from time and materials service. The problem is that Field Service Organizations (FSOs) often attempt to sell service contracts without providing justification about why a service contract is better than simply paying for service on a time and materials basis.

A common saying among sales professionals is that customers buy emotionally and then defend their purchases logically. All too often, FSOs provide little emotional reason why a customer should purchase as service contract as opposed to T & M and even less logical supporting evidence about why a service contract is more valuable.

To achieve high attachment rates, FSOs must be able to articulate the value of their service offerings to customers as well as to their own salespeople. The value proposition must impact customers’ emotionally by addressing their fears, worries, doubts, and concerns about the impact of service or the lack thereof on their operations.

For example, fear of excessive equipment downtime, lost revenue, low machine utilization levels, or the possibility of quality defects. Of course, the FSO needs to provide logical supporting evidence why their service offering will eliminate these issues.

FSOs achieve this results by articulating, either through a sales conversation or marketing collateral, what’s included in a service contract that is not included in time & materials. This requires they do an effective job in defining the coverage, entitlements and resources available to the customer through a service contract.

They must be able to answer the customer primary question “What’s in it for me?”. If the only difference between a service contract and time & materials is that the customer can prepay for service, then there is no emotional value or logical contrast. However, if the service contract provides a preferred level of service (e.g., 4-hour response time, 99.9% uptime guarantee, 7 by 24-hour coverage, parts, etc.) or preferred price structure then the customer is presented with some real value and contrast.

Ultimately, FSOs must be able to help customers defend their purchase of service contracts. They do this by offering more value in a service contract than the customer could possibly receive through time and materials services.

Fundamentally, FSOs can deliver better service to customers under contract.

This is because the contacts provide data about the installed base and service demand requirements. As a result, FSOS can anticipate service events and be more effective at planning and allocating service resources. This, in turn, makes it possible for FSOs to provide a guaranteed level of service to their customers.

Honesty is always the best policy especially when it is supported by a guarantee and exceptional service!

Do you have any comments or questions?  Let us know by posting below !!

The Role of Data in the Servitization Journey

Data is becoming more important as we consider one of the most significant trends impacting the technology industry, "Servitization".

Several years ago, Blumberg Advisory Group worked with a company that provided hardware maintenance on film based photo labs found in big box retail outlets. Their service revenues and profits were declining because digital photography was replacing the need for film based photo labs. Although the client offered a new digital based technology to replace film based photo-labs, these systems were not being installed at the same rate as the older systems were being phased out.   Digital systems didn’t require as much service and support. They were less complex and easier to maintain than their film-based cousins.

Our client required a new strategy to offset their declining revenues and profits.  They needed a solution urgently or the parent company would shut down this division.  If we did not know the importance of data or the concept of managing the capability to serve, we would have probably recommended that the client lay off some of its field service workforce to reduce costs and improve profits.  This could have led to a downward spiral of layoffs, company morale and growth.

So what steps did we take?  We analyzed their data.  We reviewed their field engineer utilization rates, customer response times, field engineer skill levels, and the equipment on customers’ premises.  In conclusion, we found that their field engineers were not being completely utilized.  We found out that these engineers had further knowledge and expertise in supporting other types of equipment found on the customer site.  They were typically able to respond to a customer request within four hours even though the guarantee was for eight.  

Based on our analysis, we recommended that they expand their service footprint to other types of equipment located on the customers’ premises, i.e. electronic cash registers and point of sale equipment.  We also recommended that they charge a premium price to customers who required faster (e.g., 4 hour) response time.  As a result, this client went from losing 20% of their profits per year to a 50% increase in new business within 24 months of implementing our recommendations.

Ultimately, the key to our client’s success lied within the data.  Data is becoming more important as we consider one of the most significant trends impacting the Technology Industry, “Servitization”.  This trend describes the transformation that many companies are undertaking as they move from primarily selling products to generating a sizable portion of revenue and profits from services.   Ultimately, the path toward Servitization leads companies toward offering anything as a service (XaaS).  In other words, their business has reached the stage of development where they are no longer selling products or solutions to their customers, but outcomes.   For example, instead of selling a copier machine they are selling their customer the right to use the machine to produce a certain number of copies over a specific period or time.

To deliver on this promise, the provider must not only have great people, process, and technology but access to data related in terms of machine condition and performance (e.g., alerts and notifications), parts availability, field engineer location and skill sets, diagnostics, etc.  With this data in hand, the provider can ensure resources are available when needed and that the customer receives the outcome it purchased.  The data is made available through technologies like the Internet of Things, Artificial Intelligence, Virtual Reality, etc.   Examples of companies that are along the servitization journey are Rolls Royce, ABB, Siemens, Kone, and General Electric. They have generated profitable income and know that a truly exceptional service business is built on four foundations – people, process, technology, and data.

Comments or questions? 

Please post below and we will respond as soon as possible!!

Field Service Scheduling Software and What You Need to Know

Scheduling software has long been a foundational technology for field service companies allowing them to meet customer demands.

This article initially appeared in Field Service News – September 7, 2018

 

Michael Blumberg, President of the Blumberg Advisory Group lifts the lid on all of the key aspects of this crucial tool…

If you have spent any time in Field Service, you probably understand the importance of managing service delivery functions against key performance indicators (KPIs). Among the most critical KPIs in the Field Service Leaders track are First Time Fix (FTF), Service Level Agreement (SLA) Compliance or Onsite Response Time (ORT), and Mean Time to Repair (MTTR). These KPIs measure the effectiveness of a Field Service Organization (FSOs) in delivering quality service in a timely manner.

The inability to meet KPI targets may result in exponential costs, customer attrition and loss of revenue; whereas the ability to exceed customer expectations can result in customer appreciation followed by an increase in profit margins and sales. To effectively schedule/dispatch the right technician to arrive on time with the right parts and skillset plays a significant role in meeting these outcomes. This is definitely not a small feat for your typical FSO.

Scheduling and dispatching Field Service Engineers (FSE) poses a challenge for most FSOs, particularly those with more than 5 FSEs. The reason behind this is there are many variables and factors involved.

An FSO with only one or two FSEs and a few customers may not perceive scheduling to be a major challenge. The volume of service requests may be relatively low while the options of who, when and where to send them may be rather limited. Scheduling becomes more of a challenge as the volume of service requests (i.e., customers) and the number of FSEs increases.

Adding to this complexity are the business objectives and/or constraints an FSO must optimize to meet its scheduling requirements.

With additional constraints or objectives, the more difficult it becomes to produce a solid schedule. For example, if the objective is to only meet a response time commitment to the customer, then the decision is easy – assign the FSE who can arrive in a timely manner at the customer’s site.

If FTF, MTTR, and/or SLA Compliance targets are also part of the equation, it becomes even more difficult to produce that solid schedule. Adding a profit margin objective, high call volumes, multiple geographies, and a sizable pool of FSEs, the decision becomes even more overwhelming.

The reason why scheduling is so excruciating of a task is that there are numerous factors that an FSO would need to create and evaluate to determine the optimal assignment for each FSE.

This is a time-consuming activity that requires an extensive amount of computational power to achieve. Many companies have suffered from a loss of time and resources in dealing with confusion and potential human error. The solution is Dynamic Scheduling Software.

Dynamic Scheduling Software provides FSOs with the feature-rich functionality that streamlines, automates, and optimizes scheduling decisions.

This technology ensures the FSO sends the assigned technician to the right job having the proper skill set and arriving on time. These applications typically leverage a scheduling engine that optimizes FSE job assignment. Scheduling engines vary in their complexity ranging from those based on business rules to Linear Programming (i.e. goodness of fit) techniques, Operations Research Algorithms (e.g., Quantum Annealing, Genetic Algorithms, etc.), or Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Self-Learning applications.

The complexity of the scheduling problem, number and types of resources involved, duration of tasks, and objectives to be optimized play a role in determining which scheduling engine is most functional.

Critical factors to consider may include whether the scheduling engine can handle:

  • Multi-day projects or short duration field service visits,
  • People and assets (e.g., tools, parts, trucks, equipment) or solely people,
  • The number and types of KPIs that are part of the objective, and
  • Route planning requirements.

In evaluating Dynamic Scheduling Software, FSOs are also advised to consider the following criteria:

  • Cloud versus On-Premise Deployment Options
  • Speed and Ease of Implementation
  • Integration with Back-office Systems
  • Availability of Real-time Visibility by the Customer
  • FSO Requirements for Best of Breed or Integrated Enterprise Solution
  • Total Cost of Ownership
  • Return on Investment
  • Vendor Industry Knowledge and Experience

There are over a dozen software vendors who offer some form of dynamic scheduling functionality for field service.

Obviously, no two Dynamic Scheduling applications are alike. Each one has their points of differentiation. The best solution is a function of the level of importance the FSO places on each criterion and how each vendor meets these criteria.

Regardless of which vendor is selected, the benefits of Dynamic Scheduling are clear.

In fact, industry benchmarks show that companies who implement these types of solutions can achieve a 20% to 25% improvement in operating efficiency, field service productivity, and utilization. The impact on bottom line profitability and customer satisfaction is substantial. To enable FSOs to provide customers with an Uber-like experience and significant profitability, FSOs should consider deploying Dynamic Scheduling Software as part of their service delivery infrastructure.

Avoiding the Four Biggest Mistakes FSOs make when using Contingent Labour

This article first appeared in the June 18, 2018 online issue of Field Service News.

Michael Blumberg, President of Blumberg Advisory Group  and founder of FieldServiceInsights.com discusses  some of the most crucial mistakes field service companies can make when utilising contingent or seasonal labour…

Field Service Organizations (FSOs) in North America, UK, and Europe are increasingly turning toward crowdsourcing platforms and subcontractors to augment their field workforce.

This type of outsourcing strategy enables FSOs to become more agile in meeting customer demands for service. As a result, they [FSOs] are able to reduce costs and improve service productivity. In addition, crowdsourcing and contingent labour helps solve the problem of finding skilled labour on a rapid basis.

However, turning to subcontractors and crowdsourcing platforms does involve relinquishing some level of control over the labour force. Naturally, questions emerge about the reliability, expertise, and quality of technicians that are sourced through these options.

Over the last two years, we have spoken with dozens of companies who have or currently utilize contingent labour to either augment their existing workforce or gain greater agility and efficiency over the entire field service delivery process. The majority are satisfied with their external providers and report positive results on key performance metrics such as First Time Fix and SLA Compliance/Onsite Arrive Time.   On the other hand, a few anomalies exist where the performance of contingent labour did not meet the FSOs expectations.

Quite often, FSOs who experience subpar performance make critical mistakes when retaining and managing contingent labour.

Here is our perspective on the biggest mistakes they need to avoid:

1. Failure to fully vet individual technicians doing the work

Don’t assume that every contract technician (e.g., subcontractor, freelance, crowdsource) you dispatch has the skills, training, and experience necessary to complete the work properly and in a timely manner. Insist on viewing background checks, certifications, and credentials of every contract technician assigned to your company.

2. Failure to train and onboard technicians

Quite often companies issue work orders without to contract technicians without training or guiding them on how they’d like the work to be performed.

For example, they do not explain how they’d like the tech to greet the customer and/or notify the customer when the work is complete.  Fortunately, Internet-based learning systems make it possible for companies to train and onboard contractors in a cost-effective and rapid manner.

3. Failure to communicate with contractors

This is the biggest mistake that a company can make is hand off work orders as if they were tossing a hot potato over a fence.

This will result in problem with respect to key service performance metrics such as SLA compliance, First Time Fix, and No Fault Found.  It is important that companies provide contractors with detailed and specific instructions about the activities they need to perform on each assignment.

At the same time, contractors also need to communicate with the companies that hire them on the status of calls, issues or problems they are experiencing, and results of their actions.

4. Failure to integrate contract or crowdsourced technicians into their service delivery process

Problems can occur when there is too much of an arm’s less relationship between the company and the contractor.  In other words, there is little accountability, visibility, and control between the company and contractors/technicians, and vice versa.

The key to success lies in treating contractors as an extension of your company.  Companies can achieve this outcome by leveraging communication technology, collaboration tools, and workforce automation software.  Relying on these systems will ensure the company achieves best in class service performance through its contractor network.

In summary, FSOs experience challenges to crowdsourcing when they underestimate the level of due diligence, systems, and processes they need to put in place when utilizing this type of labour. This does not necessarily mean that they must make huge capital investments.

Rather, they are urged to design and implement processes and procedures by leveraging existing infrastructure when they can.

Devoting the time and effort to this initiative will pay off. Our research suggests that FSOs who have an unpleasant experience with contingent labour do so because they rush into the decision without much thought, planning, and preparation.

Basically, they are looking to solve an immediate problem with no consideration to future. In other words, they are taking a tactical approach to labour shortages where a strategic solution is required.

In Praise of Chat & Online Communities

How FireEye Dramatically Improved Customer Support

Over the last few years, there has been a significant move away from how we access help and support for products or services. Traditionally there would be an instruction manual and more recently a website containing the support documentation for an organization. However, in a digital mobile-first world, we are much more likely to turn to a combination of people and technology to obtain instant answers to our questions.

Advances in technology are already responsible for creating new chat and online communities. I recently spoke with John Bauer, Senior Director, Customer Support Technology at FireEye to understand how they are reducing costs and increasing efficiency by implementing a chat solution.

FireEye set out to transform customer service into a profit center by minimizing the time and effort that it takes to resolve a case. Bauer told me how when he first started there was an emphasis on email, phone and web support. Ideally, you want to leverage your web support channel because it provides the most context and is very efficient, but Bauer also advised that its chat and online communities that are the least costly and most effective.

In our conversation, he also highlighted that smaller support teams would find it relatively easy to manage their workload without the need for analytics. But, Bauer warned, as you scale, it will quickly become apparent, just how much time, and money can be saved through by leveraging analytics.

What many fail to realize is that chat allows organizations to exchange information and, direct customers to articles and documentation, and close calls quicker than the phone, web, or email.  Online communities enable customers to help other customers, monitor discussions and input as required. And it requires far less personnel to maintain community interactions than email or phone support.

The value bombs quickly became apparent. Moving away from the phone to online chat provided 30% in cost savings and 30% faster resolutions. After previously investing in around 30 FTEs for knowledge creation purposes to deliver email and phone support at another organization, Bauer only needed 2-3 FTEs to create valuable content for their online communities.

Research by the team at FireEye enabled them to learn that when a customer needed help, approximately 50% of the time they would go to a knowledgebase article, 40% go to the community, and only 10% would ever head towards documentation.

A few years ago, many companies approached the invasion of social media with an element of fear. Equally, FireEye faced the same resistance internally when looking to embrace community features. On the one hand, it’s glaringly obvious that people want to communicate directly with a human to obtain an immediate answer to their questions, but on the other, employees are fearful about negative connotations that could arise from conflict and disputes voiced over social media

Some might argue that the risk of a disgruntled customer broadcasting negative stuff about you or your company would never end on a positive note. Replying to them rather than burying your heads in the sand seems much more progressive.  You should never underestimate the power of your community either. There is something quite beautiful about the moment when your own customers jump in to tackle challenging behavior in their community. Bauer, even stated, “With communities, you will find customers whose seemingly full-time job became being a champion.”

Once again, it was analytics that illustrated the strength of the case to deliver tangible results. 30% faster time to resolve cases, 30% less effort required. Yet, discovering that 90% of visitors to their community only consumed information from their communities also proved to be incredibly valuable to FireEye.

Although a community of any kind needs people to manage and nurture it, the most interesting aspect of their discovery was that is also delivered a much higher ROI. The FireEye community was measured against call avoidance, currently at 25% of support demand; the ultimate goal at FireEye was for customers to find their own answers, through a Self-Service model, and move away from the time-consuming process of logging a case through email or telephone.

However, Bauer also warned that implementing chat can only be successful if your community responds quickly. Failure to engage with a customer within one minute will cause your abandon rate to skyrocket and stop chat adoption in its tracks. For these reasons alone, Bauer needed a platform that he could entrust with FireEye’s reputation.

Bauer told me, “You need to be committed. Starting a community is like having a child. For most enterprises, it will take 12-24 months of commitment to building community before it starts to operate organically.” We often over complicate tech solutions by investing countless hours trying to introduce sophisticated functionality. However, the secret to the successful implementation and adoption of chat technology at FireEye seems to be the use of both chat and communities to solve a problem for the customer. Maybe this is a lesson we can all learn from.

Please share your thoughts and insights by commenting below.

Why The Customer Experience Should Be At The Heart Of Marketing and Selling Services

Consumers now reside in a digital world where instant gratification is the new currency. The rise of Spotify, Netflix, Amazon Prime Now and Uber ensures they can avoid any pain points and get what they want and when they want it in a new on demand economy.

However, the ‘we want it now’ consumer continues to evolve and now expects a personalized experience too. If online services know what their favorite movies, TV shows and music they like, surely retailers will know what they like too.

Tech savvy users are looking for businesses to lead the way with new technology that continues to treat them as unique individuals. A generic marketing e-mail with their name pasted at the top in a different font is no longer going to cut it.

The evolution of the customer experience has even given birth to the phrase Martech which is the blending of marketing and technology. Industries across multiple industries are all facing the same problem as the digital transformation of everything gathers pace.

Keeping up with all the latest trends across the digital landscape is no longer an option it should be compulsory for anyone serious about the future of their business. The good news is that you are not alone and the fact that 76% of field service providers were reportedly struggling to achieve revenue growth should be the only wake-up call that you need to take this seriously.

However, there are numerous field service winners here too. For example, in 2017 there are many organizations providing seamless digital experiences and delivering faster resolution times. It is often said that technology works best when it brings together and here is a selection of great examples.

The Value of Improving the Customer Journey

Personalization is much more than just another industry buzzword but a reaction to the demand driven by consumers. Providing the right experience at the right time is an art that many are still learning to master. But, the ability to increase 15% percent of revenue and lower the cost of serving customers by 20% is a language that every member of the boardroom will understand.

Do Not Underestimate the Importance of Customer Service

According to Microsoft, an incredible 97% of consumers advised customer service is critical to their choice or loyalty to a brand. But it’s also crucial to remember how this is across self-service, social, phone, mobile and a plethora of devices.

The divide between offline and online is disappearing. No matter what device we have at hand, wherever we are located and if we are using our keyboard, touchscreen or even voice, the experience should be the same.

Poor Customer Service Will Be Punished

It is well understood that it costs businesses more to acquire a new customer than it does to keep an existing one. Savvy consumers will happily shop around for the best deal. Ironically many companies seem to treat their current clients with contempt arrogantly and assume they will stay with them regardless.

The reality here in 2017 is that 64% of consumers have switched providers in at least one industry due to poor customer service according to Accenture. We no longer suffer fools gladly, and a lack of patience or frustration will ensure most consumers will switch providers after only one negative experience.

In this digital age, loyalty must now be earned rather than taken for granted. The only question that remains is what are you doing about it?

Time Is Money

An Amazon Prime account makes one-click ordering and delivery within 2 hours a reality. Maybe, we shouldn’t be too surprised how our time is becoming increasingly valuable. Forrester recently advised that 73% of consumers will happily admit that their time is the most important factor where businesses need to focus.

Pain points such as long-winded automated phone menus, cumbersome online chats or waiting around between 9 am and 6 pm for somebody to call you will no longer be tolerated. Organizations need to manage the expectations of their customers and remove friction to offer a truly simplified service in a timely manner.

Make Way for The Internet of Things (IoT)

With 50 Billion internet-connected devices by 2020, the time to take IoT seriously is right now. Consumers do not care about your product roadmaps; they now expect the same experience with any of their devices.

There is already a long line of competitors offering similar services. Failing to keep up will leave your brand looking like a tired Sears or J. C. Penney store that failed to keep up with the speed of hyper change across the digital landscape.

OVERALL

Advances in machine learning, deep learning, and artificial intelligence have already made real-time personalization a reality. A dramatic rise in expectation levels means that users of all ages now demand the same experiences across multiple platforms.

Mainstream audiences are looking for businesses to lead the way and provide the wow factor through technology based solutions. However, sometimes, they just want greater digital interaction and to be treated as a unique individual from a fellow human being.

Schedule a Free Consultation Today

Customer Service Success or Failure

customer service

Any company wishing to succeed must strive to provide great customer service.  With today’s culture demanding instant gratification, customers do not hesitate to take to social media to inform everyone of a company’s failure. So how does an organization arm itself not only to provide great service but to know what to do if they fail?  Here are some articles which discuss both success tactics and also give examples of failures and how to avoid them.

10 Reasons Organizations Fail To Deliver Great Customer Service
By Shep Hyken

Customer success or failure starts from company leadership.  This includes the company’s vision of how to provide great service, the training process including onboarding and ongoing training, and how employees are treated. In addition this article discusses the importance of hiring the right personnel to carry out the mission of great customer service and then celebrating their successes.

How Service Companies Can Earn Customer Trust and Keep It
By Leonard L. Berry

In this article Leonard Berry focuses on the idea of customer confidence which can be lost through poor customer service. Berry specifically cites the recent United Airline customer service incident which clearly failed on all accounts. He goes on to discuss ways to gain and to keep trust and also how to recover  that trust when it may be lost. He stresses the idea of being aware of and meeting a customer’s “perceived contract” and not just the actual contract.

NIGHTMARE: 7 Customer Service Blunders That Went Viral
By Patricia Laya

Patricia Laya outlines 7 customer service failures of both worldwide and regional companies who deal directly with consumers. She outlines how the companies responded and in many cases how their response changed after these consumers took to social media to get their story out to the public. Specifically she details the case of a musician who continued to write songs and make music videos about his terrible experience long after the incident.

The Power of Prevention In Customer Service
By Len Markidan

Len Markidan’s premise is that most customer service failures do not happen just once. If you are able to recognize the issues that recur and not only fix the individual situations, but also look for and fix the root problem, then you will experience greater success. Doing so gives your customers a better experience and saves your company time and money in the long run.

Why reactive service is a thing of the past?
By Sarah Nicastro

Historically, “service” had been viewed as something provided as a reaction to a problem identified by a customer.  More recently, we have seen a move to proactive service.  This article, first published on Field Technologies Online, was posted as a guest post from Sarah Nicastro on my blog site.  In the post she specifically discusses the importance and advantage of Machine to Machine (M2M) and Internet of Things (IoT) as tools valuable to both the service provider and the customer.

First-Time Fix Rate: The DNA of Field Service
by Michael Blumberg

In this blog post, I discuss the importance of First-Time Fix Rates, (e.g., the rate at which a field service company can resolve or fix an issue on the first attempt). This important Key Performance Indicator can not only make or break the relationship with a customer but also have a tremendous impact on the company’s cost of providing the service. I also discuss ways to improve this rate.

I welcome you to join the discussion. Do you have any customer service failures or successes to share? What lessons did you or your company learn? How have you been able to make changes to give your customers a better experience?  If you are looking to evaluate your own company’s customer service capabilities or looking to find ways to improve your service, contact me and schedule a free 30 minute consultation.