"Our Take" - Move to the Front of the Line

(Past Editions by: Date, Title, Topic)

 
About "Our Take" 
"Our Take" is a collection of daily vignettes covering a wide range of CRM topics. It's an attempt to add our own spin to the world of CRM. We will use the column to share our perspectives, opinions, epiphanies, web nuggets, or quite frankly anything that moves us. Get ready to expect the unexpected. And, don't be shy about sharing your thoughts.
 
 
8/6/07 - Move to the Front of the Line
Many of you may be aware that some theme parks allow you to pay a premium to move to the front of the line. Many patrons value their time so much they are willing to pay more than double the regular price.
 
What if more call centers took that approach? Imagine hearing the following message: "The estimated wait for the next available agent is 15 minutes. However, for a $20 credit card charge, you can speak immediately to an agent. Please have your credit card ready and press one."
 
Do you have a personal experience with this type of service option? Does this concept create loyalty among the most valued customers or is it a revenue-generating scheme resulting in even longer wait queues?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
8/7/07 - Don't Move to the Front of the Line
Mail from yesterday's column about allowing customers to pay a premium to move to the front of the line was almost unanimous. The vast majority of readers that responded described this contact center strategy as suicide.
 
One reader wrote: "My take is that paying a fee to hop to the head of the queue is a bad customer experience. There may be companies that are so myopically focused on quarter-to-quarter profit that this may be appealing to them, but in just a few quarters this strategy would lead to a downward customer churn spiral." Another wrote: "I’d liken it to pulling the pin on a hand grenade and then stuffing it in your mouth."
 
While this premium service seems to work for the theme parks, most professionals say "no thank you" to adapting the business practice to the contact center. Are there specific scenarios where it does work for the contact center? Read more tomorrow.
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
8/8/07 - Offensive Moves
This week, we have been talking about the wisdom of allowing customers that call into the contact center to move to the front of the line. Today, I will share more reader comments. One reader wrote:
 
"I am seriously opposed to allowing customers to go the head of the queue by paying extra. I think it is OK to have a contract that I paid for up front that gives me longer hours of access or access to higher level agents, but going to the head of the queue on a "pay as you call" basis is distasteful. It seems to make money the only way to get decent service. Extra money should get me exceptional service, but if I have to pay extra to get acceptable service, that is offensive."
 
Others wrote with similar comments that allowing a premium level of service is OK if it is pre-arranged but allowing for it on a transaction by transaction basis can be a slippery slope for both sides - the business and the customer. Indirectly, I guess we have circled back around to the discussion of service level agreements. More on the subject tomorrow.
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
8/9/07 - Differentiated Service Levels
We have received a wide range of comments and suggestions regarding the pros and cons of allowing customers to moving to the front of the contact center line. I will continue to share more comments in the coming days. But today, I would like to ask you a question and encourage you to tell me what you think. Here's the question:
 
Let’s say you need the services of a plumber. When you call for service, the agent says you have the option of choosing three levels of response time. The standard response time is 24 to 48 hours. Expedited, same day service, can be purchased for a premium. Lastly, for an even higher premium, the next available plumber will be dispatched immediately. For the sake of this exercise, let's assume the amount of the premiums make sense so a customer adequately value his/her sense of urgency - is this an annoying leak or a busted pipe transforming the basement into a pool?
 
Do you feel this type of service value differentiation is good business or bad business? Why or why not? Tell us what you think and I will summarize the collective knowledge of all our smart readers.
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
8/10/07 - Who's Fault Is It?
This week, I asked the same question two different ways. First, is it OK to offer a customer the option of paying extra to move to the front of the queue when calling into a call center? Yesterday, I asked if it is OK to offer customers the option of paying extra for expedited service.
 
One reader responded, "There’s a critical difference. When you call a plumber, rarely is the problem the plumber’s fault. But when you call for customer service, most often the caller at least perceives that it’s all or partly the company’s fault. Ergo, customer expectations are very different."
 
Indeed, customer expectations are different. When the customer feels they have been wronged, the last thing they want is an offer to pay to get service. On the other hand, when they need service and there is no prior expectation, the option to pay a premium can actually be a benefit. Even a differentiator. Does your business know when to offer premium services at a premium prices in a way customers value?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
8/14/07 - Preferential Treatment
This month, we have been discussing the wisdom of offering differentiated service for those willing to pay. Specifically, we discussed the option of allowing customers to move to the front of the line of a call center queue for an additional fee. The other day, I read a short Q&A on another CRM web site. Some advise me not to share because the article is from a source considered a competitive alternative. However, if there is something that I feel might be of value to you, I will share regardless of the source.
 
I have the utmost respect for Don Peppers and Martha Rogers. In the article, they answer the question: Should profitable customers be the top priority for our customer service efforts? In the article, you are asked to consider weighing the value of different types of customers - currently profitable, growable, and below-zero. In addition, they suggest you consider the cost of servicing these various customer segments.
 
Let me also direct your attention to the end of the piece where they talk about it being OK to cutting the most costly customers from your ranks suggesting they find "nirvana" with their competitors. Any exercise to identify the most valuable customers can and should result in a better understanding of the least valuable customers too. Is that how you segment your customers?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
8/15/07 - More Preferential Treatment
Yesterday, I shared an article addressing the question about whether profitable customers should be the top priority for customer service efforts. The article suggests segmenting customers by profitability as well as the cost to service each segment. In response, one reader wrote:
 
"At a previous company, we segmented our customers into 7 major classes and 19+ sub-classes. While we understood which of our customers stratified as most valuable (MV), most growable (MG) and Below Zero (BZ), we did absolutely nothing from a market perspective to a) attract the ideal customer segment; b) develop tactics, products & services to move MG's to MV's or c) to understand why BZ's were BZ's. What's the point of doing all that work when it is not actionable? I believe the downfall of my former employer is that we tried to be all things to all people with a shrinking customer value proposition.
 
The situation has some very valuable lessons. First, what you learn from segmentation will give you a totally new view of your customers. But that perspective is useless unless you can translate your findings into actions that make a difference. Second, beware of the shrinking customer value proposition fostered by a belief that you can be all things to all people. What actions has your company taken based on the value of various customer segments?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
8/16/07 - Line Jumping
Last week, we discussed the strategy and wisdom of allowing callers into a call center to move to the front of the line for a fee. I have enjoyed the many comments, feedback, and stories. Today, I thought I would share one of those stories.
 
One software company had an interesting queuing system for their VARs. First, any VAR who called and said that he was on site with a customer automatically went to the head of the queue. If he abused the system then his record was flagged and he lost the privilege. Secondly, Senior VARs were assumed to have good technical knowledge of the system so they were automatically routed to level 2 support. Thirdly, customers with support contracts got higher priority than those without. The system seemed to work very well.
 
Let me point out a few things. This strategy seems to translate what the company views as most important into front line action. It seems to be based on the knowledge based on past experiences about how to best handle a queue. Also, the criteria for moving to the head of the queue is pre-determined and not based on an individual deciding to pay extra at the moment. What is your strategy for allowing customers to line jump your call center?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)