The Performance Improvement Blog

Reprise: Training Will Not Eliminate Racist Behavior in Starbucks

In a letter that Howard Schultz, Executive Chairman of Starbucks, published in today's New York Times, he describes what his stores and offices will be doing this afternoon to address the problem of racial bias in the company:  

More than 175,000 Starbucks partners (that's what we call our employees) will be sharing life experiences, hearing from others, listening to experts, reflecting on the realities of bias in our society and talking about how all of us create public spaces where everyone feels like they belong - because they do. This conversation will continue at our company and become part of how we train all of our partners.

Again, I commend Starbucks for attacking the problem but I continue to have my doubts about the long term effects of their approach. On April 19, 2018, I wrote about these concerns. That blog post is repeated here:

 

In response to a racially charged incident at a Starbucks in Philadelphia that resulted in the unnecessary arrests of two black males waiting for a friend, the company has announced that it will “…close more than 8,000 of its stores on May 29 to conduct anti-racial bias training for nearly 175,000 employees.”

While this response is commendable, if that’s all Starbucks does to eliminate racism among its staff, it will be a significant waste of time, money, and effort. I understand, putting all of their employees through training is good optics for the company and might provide some protection from lawsuits. But change in the culture requires so much more.

In the wake of the Starbucks incident, The New York Times asks the question, “Can Training Eliminate Biases?” The answer is “no”. Diversity and inclusion in companies is not achieved through a workshop. That’s not how people change behavior. Only culture change can eliminate biases. Training might be a good first step in raising awareness for some, but attitudes and actions must be supported consistently by the entire organization over time. Diversity and inclusion must be rooted in the processes and life of the organization.

As I wrote in a blog post on May 31, 2008 titled, From Diversity to Inclusion and Engagement:

Third Sector New England has, from its nearly five decades of experience, identified the following as key drivers of successful diversity initiatives:

• A diversity committee/task force, representing all levels of the organization, that regularly communicates with the entire organization
• Unflinching commitment by the CEO to convey the benefits of organizational diversity to the organization’s mission, vision and values
• An organization-wide assessment or cultural audit to determine major challenges and barriers
• Prioritizing those challenges
• A clear designation of key participants, action steps and timelines to address challenges
• Skill-building for moving beyond differences to develop an organizational language and culture of inclusiveness
• Alignment of diversity planning with the organization’s strategic plan, so the former includes an assessment of funding and other resources needed to support the effort
• A consultant to facilitate developing and implementing a diversity plan
• Evaluation of progress at regular intervals
• Reassessment of priorities as needed

In addition to these elements of comprehensive planning, an organizataion has to make some fundamental changes in how it works. Employees need to hear their senior managers talking frequently about diversity and inclusion. It’s not enough that the value of diversity and inclusion is listed on a laminated poster in the employee lounge. This value must be visible in the day-to-day actions of the company. Employees must see diversity in hiring and promotions, as well as among Board members and executives. The ability to accept differences must be in the criteria for hiring. Employees must see evidence that their company partners only with other companies that make a sincere effort at improving diversity and inclusion and eliminating racism. Managers need to step up and take responsibility for creating a welcoming and supportive culture in every part of the organization.  

Managers must recognize that not everyone has the same receptivity to change and act accordingly. Amber Madison has identified four archetypes of diversity and inclusion: the champion; the newbie; the bigot; and the bystander. She suggests that managers address each type differently. I recommend hiring "champions" and "newbies" and avoiding hiring "bigots" and "bystanders" as much as possible.

As we argue in our new book, Minds at Work: Managing for Success in the Knowledge Economy, managers must help to develop the people around them. And this means eliminating the discrimination that contributes to a hostile work environment. Racism is bad enough, but if there is racism, then there is sexism and antisemitism and antimuslimism and every other kind of discrimination. In addition to the immorality of that kind of workplace, that environment is not conducive to learning and people doing their best work, whether you’re a barista in a store or CEO of the company.

In fairness to Starbucks, a company that I admire, let me say that they are facing the same kind of racism that all companies face and is ingrained in our society. With over 27,000 locations worldwide, it's surprising more incidences of racial bias haven't been reported. But that's not an excuse and the company must do more to ensure that diversity and inclusion permeate its culture. However, training is not the answer.

Photo by Clem Onojeghuo on Unsplash

Again, I commend Starbucks for attacking the problem but I continue to have my doubts about the long term effects of their approach. On April 19, 2018, I wrote about these concerns. That blog post is repeated here:

 

In response to a racially charged incident at a Starbucks in Philadelphia that resulted in the unnecessary arrests of two black males waiting for a friend, the company has announced that it will “…close more than 8,000 of its stores on May 29 to conduct anti-racial bias training for nearly 175,000 employees.”

While this response is commendable, if that’s all Starbucks does to eliminate racism among its staff, it will be a significant waste of time, money, and effort. I understand, putting all of their employees through training is good optics for the company and might provide some protection from lawsuits. But change in the culture requires so much more.

In the wake of the Starbucks incident, The New York Times asks the question, “Can Training Eliminate Biases?” The answer is “no”. Diversity and inclusion in companies is not achieved through a workshop. That’s not how people change behavior. Only culture change can eliminate biases. Training might be a good first step in raising awareness for some, but attitudes and actions must be supported consistently by the entire organization over time. Diversity and inclusion must be rooted in the processes and life of the organization.

As I wrote in a blog post on May 31, 2008 titled, From Diversity to Inclusion and Engagement:

Third Sector New England has, from its nearly five decades of experience, identified the following as key drivers of successful diversity initiatives:

• A diversity committee/task force, representing all levels of the organization, that regularly communicates with the entire organization
• Unflinching commitment by the CEO to convey the benefits of organizational diversity to the organization’s mission, vision and values
• An organization-wide assessment or cultural audit to determine major challenges and barriers
• Prioritizing those challenges
• A clear designation of key participants, action steps and timelines to address challenges
• Skill-building for moving beyond differences to develop an organizational language and culture of inclusiveness
• Alignment of diversity planning with the organization’s strategic plan, so the former includes an assessment of funding and other resources needed to support the effort
• A consultant to facilitate developing and implementing a diversity plan
• Evaluation of progress at regular intervals
• Reassessment of priorities as needed

In addition to these elements of comprehensive planning, an organizataion has to make some fundamental changes in how it works. Employees need to hear their senior managers talking frequently about diversity and inclusion. It’s not enough that the value of diversity and inclusion is listed on a laminated poster in the employee lounge. This value must be visible in the day-to-day actions of the company. Employees must see diversity in hiring and promotions, as well as among Board members and executives. The ability to accept differences must be in the criteria for hiring. Employees must see evidence that their company partners only with other companies that make a sincere effort at improving diversity and inclusion and eliminating racism. Managers need to step up and take responsibility for creating a welcoming and supportive culture in every part of the organization.  

Managers must recognize that not everyone has the same receptivity to change and act accordingly. Amber Madison has identified four archetypes of diversity and inclusion: the champion; the newbie; the bigot; and the bystander. She suggests that managers address each type differently. I recommend hiring "champions" and "newbies" and avoiding hiring "bigots" and "bystanders" as much as possible.

As we argue in our new book, Minds at Work: Managing for Success in the Knowledge Economy, managers must help to develop the people around them. And this means eliminating the discrimination that contributes to a hostile work environment. Racism is bad enough, but if there is racism, then there is sexism and antisemitism and antimuslimism and every other kind of discrimination. In addition to the immorality of that kind of workplace, that environment is not conducive to learning and people doing their best work, whether you’re a barista in a store or CEO of the company.

In fairness to Starbucks, a company that I admire, let me say that they are facing the same kind of racism that all companies face and is ingrained in our society. With over 27,000 locations worldwide, it's surprising more incidences of racial bias haven't been reported. But that's not an excuse and the company must do more to ensure that diversity and inclusion permeate its culture. However, training is not the answer.

Photo by Clem Onojeghuo on Unsplash

The Changing World of Work

Microsoft and PopTech have created an eight part video series that describes how the world of work is changing, in both the company workplace and the global workplace.

 

The videos present these eight core themes:

1. Digital technology and an abundance of information are causing profound changes in the way people work.
2. To be competitive, companies are shifting from a focus on “efficiency of process” to a focus on “effectiveness of outcomes.”
3. Companies are being more responsive to the decision-making and information needs of employees.
4. Employees are more interconnected and, therefore, more interested in a collective response to business issues.
5. Leaders are developing adaptive organizations that depend on collaboration and trust.
6. Human contact matters; therefore, workplaces are being designed to increase collaboration.
7. Workplaces are being designed to accommodate a wide variety of spaces that fit the range of workers’ needs.
8. Automation is eliminating jobs but also providing an opportunity to create new, more creative jobs.

The 23 notable speakers in this video series emphasize that continuous learning must be a part of this new workplace that is local and global. They say that we don’t know what tomorrow will bring so we need to continually learn how to adapt to whatever comes at us and whatever we seek to change. And given this rapid transformation and increasingly networked world, adaptability is key.  Stanley McChrystal says it this way:

…when you combine the two, speed and interconnectedness, suddenly you have this unpredictability, so you don’t know what tomorrow will be like, you don’t know what next week, and you certainly don’t know next year is like…so you’ve got to have adaptability to respond to changing conditions so organically, it has to be in the DNA of the organization so that it doesn’t have to come from top down directives that says, “now we are going to produce a new version of this”. Instead, it allows the organization to learn, adjust, and adapt automatically. 

50 Ways to Lever Learning

(My apologies to Paul Simon.)

In a learning culture, formal training is just one of many methods used to facilitate employee learning. In a learning culture, we start with the performance goal and then select the mix of methods that will help employees acquire and retain the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs they need in order to achieve those goals. This is a list of 50 of those methods. The first 25 are primarily instructor-directed; the second 25 are primarily learner-directed.

1. Instructor-centered class (fact to face) – traditional classroom in which instructor controls the content and learning process
2. Instructor-centered class (virtual) – similar to classroom except instructor delivers instruction via the Web and class can be synchronous or asynchronous
3. Instructor-facilitated seminar – meeting convened by an instructor; learners discuss a topic relevant to their work and chosen by instructor
4. Instructor-facilitated workshop – meeting convened by an instructor; participants learn from experience of working together on solving a problem or creating something new
5. eLearning  – content delivered to learner via computer; usually desktop computer
6. Mobile learning – a form of elearning that is accessed by a mobile device such as smart phone or tablet; can be anywhere, anytime
7. Coaching – a relationship in which a trained coach helps an employee develop the knowledge and skills to be a more effective manager by addressing real situations that manager faces in workplace
8. Mentoring – a relationship in which senior leaders impart their knowledge and wisdom on employees who are learning to be leaders
9. Learning alliance – a relationship between managers and their direct reports that focuses on employee learning and how managers can support that learning
10. Game –engaging employees in learning by applying principles of gaming (scoring, competition, rules of play, etc.) to create an experience that is interactive and fun
11. Simulation – replicating real-life problem solving within a safe environment; for example, learning business acumen by working with a team to solve a typical business problem and receiving immediate feedback on their performance
12. On-campus college courses – attending for-credit courses or non-credit courses that are relevant to one’s job
13. External online courses (e.g., MOOCs) – taking relevant courses online from leading institutions and from renowned faculty
14. Webinars – participating in a Web-based program using video conferencing software; usually a one-session offering by an expert on a specific topic
15. Internship – working in a temporary position for the purpose of learning about a job, the work environment of that job, and the organizational culture
16. Apprenticeship – working under the guidance of experienced employees for the purpose of learning specific skills
17. Business case-study – drawing lessons from discussing the documented story of actual events in another organization
18. Performance measurement – learning from measures of performance such as sales figures, production numbers, and customer service feedback
19. Success Case Evaluation Method – a method of evaluating training (or any learning intervention) by identifying those participants who successfully applied learning in the organization and telling their stories; learning comes from analyzing those stories and drawing useful conclusions from successes and failures
20. Assessment center – a dedicated space where employees participate in exercises designed to simulate the conditions of their jobs; observers look for specific behaviors that indicate the employee’s suitability for the work; learning comes from receiving performance feedback and planning how to improve
21. Department meetings – often a lost opportunity for learning, these gatherings can be designed so that participants learn about processes such as planning, project management, innovation, and evaluation
22. Testing knowledge – using results of knowledge tests to facilitate more learning
23. Testing performance – using results of behavioral demonstrations of learning to facilitate more learning
24. Training evaluation – learning from evidence (quantitative and qualitative) collected to show the impact that particular training programs have on individuals, teams, and the organization as a whole
25. Learning Management System (LMS) – using the data from training program tracking software as a focus for discussing employee learning goals and progress toward those goals
26. Roleplay – people (usually two or three) acting out roles to learn about themselves and others by putting themselves in somebody else’s shoes
27. Reflection-in-action – learning from reflecting on an activity while doing it
28. Reflection-on-action – learning from reflecting on an activity by looking back on what happened
29. Reflection-for-action – learning by applying what was learned to a new situation
30. Daily log – individual employees writing or recording learning from each day of work and then discussing their observations with co-workers
31. Survey debrief – meeting with co-workers and other stakeholders to discuss what can be learned from the results of company surveys (such as pulse, employee satisfaction, and climate)
32. Experiments – gathering evidence in a controlled environment to support or refute a particular change that is being proposed (for example, testing an innovation in the product development process)
33. Prototyping – testing a new design of a product or process by constructing an example or model and then trying it out and learning from what happens
34. Content apps – using a software application on a mobile device to provide information and instruction on-the-job, just-in-time
35. Job share – splitting the hours required for a job with someone else and sharing experiences with each other for the purpose of learning
36. Job rotation – trying out different jobs in an organization for the purpose of discovering the best fit and, at the same time, learning about the organization and its culture
37. Community of practice – people who share the same interests or responsibilities in an organization come together to learn from each other
38. Social media – using computer-mediated platforms for sharing information, such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and blogs
39. Benchmarking – learning by comparing the structure, policies, practices, products, and programs of one’s organization to the best in the industry
40. Structured observation – learning about some aspect of individual, team, or organizational behavior by observing what occurs according to a set of questions and criteria
41. Books and articles – reading books and articles that have information and expert advice about an area of needed performance improvement
42. Video – learning as-needed from high-quality, relevant videos on sites such as TED and YouTube
43. Recordings – learning as-needed from high-quality, relevant recordings of presentations by business and organizational experts
44. Team reflection – working with team members to find useful meaning in data about team performance
45. Enterprise-wide reflection – working with co-workers across the organization to find useful meaning in data about organization performance
46. Performance support tools - print or electronic tools, such as checklists, micro-lessons, and video demonstrations, used post-training to ensure on-going performance improvement
47. Interactive performance support system (IPSS) – performance support tools that allow the user to interact with Web-based materials for the purpose of shaping the support being provided so that it’s just-in-time and just-enough
48. Professional conferences – attending local, regional, national, and international meetings that have presentations of content relevant to one’s work; learning comes from reflecting on that content and discussing application with others
49. Book groups – groups of employees meeting during the workday to discuss a book they have all read; they learn from the discussion about how it applies to their work
50. Internal wiki – like Wikipedia, this is a company Web site where any employee can contribute content that might be helpful to every employee’s learning; this could include relevant books and videos, tools such as checklists, best practices, survey results, project results, etc.

I’m sure you can think of more ways to lever learning. What would you add to this list?

Performance Management and Alignment of Values

A number of large companies are confronting (willingly and unwillingly) the issues around their own performance management and making some hard choices to try to improve performance by changing workplace culture. They are faced with tradeoffs between what they aspire to be as an organization and what has evolved from the intended and unintended pressures they put on their employees.

Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos’ response to recent New York Times articles about work-life in the company, exposes a lack of alignment between the kind of organization that Bezos espouses and the organization that actually exists for many workers.

Brad Federman summarizes the charges against the Amazon culture in this way:

Shocking workloads, memorizing leadership principles, laminated cards describing the culture, quizzes on the culture and rewards for perfect scores, pushed to play devil’s advocate, late nights, sabotaging others careers, mechanisms to secretively provide feedback on other employees, significant turnover valued, high risk/high reward, attractive stock options, lack of concern for people with health issues or personal crisis, practiced use of counselling out, purposeful Darwinism, a.k.a Amazon.

Bezos, on the other hand, wrote in an email to his employees this week that he expects them to show empathy for the problems of their coworkers and “…hopefully, you’re having fun working with a bunch of brilliant teammates, helping invent the future, and laughing along the way.”  Apparently, Bezos thinks that Amazon is a happy, collaborative culture. This isn’t what many employees are reporting.

Zappos CEO Tony Hseih is adapting Holacracy to his organization in order to increase employee involvement and commitment. Theoretically, this structure is leaderless and depends on self-management. Zappos (owned by Amazon) also faces a cultural alignment challenge. I wrote about this in a previous post:

I do wonder about an apparent disconnect between the intention to create a company in which there are no managers and self-management and self-organization are highly valued, yet the decision to become that kind of company was decided by the CEO and is being enforced as if the company is still hierarchical and command and control. Zappo’s might aspire to be leaderless, but that will be very hard to achieve for a company in which the charismatic founder and inspirational leader is still around and the parent company is a much more traditional organization.  

Cultural change is a struggle, especially when espoused values do not align with values in use. Leaders can aspire to a humane, egalitarian workplace but if the incentives are elsewhere, employees will behave in response to the incentives. If managers are rewarded (pay, promotion, recognition, etc.) for the amount of work they do and the amount of time they spend at work, they will do all the things they need to do to look busy and productive. And they will expect the same of their direct reports. If managers are rewarded for treating their employees humanely and for involving them in decision-making, that’s what employees will do for each other. There must be alignment.

Some companies are working hard at alignment. Accenture is eliminating annual performance reviews and ranking of employees. Instead, managers are expected to provide ongoing feedback to their direct reports. CEO Pierre Nanterme became convinced that annual performance reviews and rankings were not improving performance. He believes that what improves performance is just-in-time feedback around everyday work activities. He wants employees to learn and grow and is trying to align the performance management system with those values.

Business leaders need to pay more attention to workplace culture. These days, the competition is fierce and the expectations of customers are high.  Espoused values need to be aligned with values in use if they are going to have a chance to achieve the level of productivity, creativity, and innovation needed to compete and succeed over the long term.

What Gets Measured Gets Done…Revisited Again

The phrase, "what gets measured gets done," has become a rallying cry for trainers and evaluators. We use this to justify our work and convince CEOs that they should invest in performance measurement. However, as I've argued in previous posts, the saying is not always true and, in fact, is misleading.

One implication of the phrase is that if you measure something (customer service, productivity, sales, revenue, etc.), people will pay attention to what is being measured and do what they can to improve those outcomes. Many examples refute this logic. GM measures quality of every part and every car yet still has recalled 29 million vehicles so far this year. The Veterans Health Administration measures patient waiting time yet still is under congressional scrutiny for wait times that were much too long. Lehman Brothers, once one of the largest investment banks in the U.S., constantly measured the performance of the securities it owned and managed, yet still had to declare bankruptcy in 2008.

In each of those cases, it appears that key stakeholders had the data but did not use the data to make their decisions. It’s as if they were trying to fulfill a compliance requirement without a commitment to improvement. Or they didn’t want to know because that would mean they would have to change something. Measurement alone is not sufficient; it’s the application of those results to decision-making that gets things done.

A variation on "what gets measured gets done," is, “what you measure is what you get.” To me, this saying has a slightly different meaning. This is more about the importance of choosing the right measure for the situation so that you are reinforcing the intended behavior and not something that you don’t want. I once consulted with a state Blue Cross Blue Shield office that proclaimed their commitment to customer service but evaluated customer service reps on the basis of how many calls they handled each hour. Number of calls handled went up; customer service went down.

Jane Bozarth, in her recent column for Learning Solutions Magazine, writes this about choosing the right measure:

Begin with the end in mind: who is the target audience, what do they need to do, how do we measure whether they are the ones accessing the program, and how do we measure their performance?

So: When looking for measures, try to find things that are meaningful, that give you real information to help real people do their jobs and to help organizations perform more efficiently. Beware of easy measures and vanity metrics.

Good advice! The tendency so often is to look for the lost key under the streetlamp because that’s where the light is. Measures are chosen because “we’ve always done it that way” or because “that’s what we know how to measure” or “that’s what everyone else does.” As Bozarth suggests, decide on what behavior you want and then decide on the best way to measure that behavior. In that way, you’re more likely to get the data and results that you need.

However, here too, the phrase has limits. What you measure is not always what you get. Many organizational factors can intervene. Maybe you are measuring the right things in the best way, but managers don’t value those outcomes, or the findings are not communicated to the stakeholders, or intervening events and unintended consequences are not factored into the results. Again, it’s not measurement per se, but what is done with those measures that makes the difference.

Joy to the World of Work

 

It’s fitting, in this holiday season, to be talking about "joy".  Menlo Innovations, a software development company in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has made a joyful workplace its goal and has found that, by doing this, business success follows. In Joy, Inc., a new book by Richard Sheridan, Co-Founder and CEO of Menlo, we read how his company makes joy the center of its business model.  

Starting in 2001 and even after considerable growth and changes in location, the company has succeeded in maintaining a work environment that is joyful. Most observers would have said, “Not possible; maybe for a few months or a year but no longer; and certainly not in a weak economy.” These observers have been proven wrong and every indication is that Menlo is sustainable. Joy, Inc. tells how this happened.

Being joyful is serious business. Sheridan writes:

 

At Menlo, we have fun, we laugh a lot, and there is almost always palpable energy - but we aren’t always happy. We have a shared belief system. We are focused and driven. At times, we are cynical and sometimes downright angry. We use the energy of our anger and cynicism to fuel our work, in hopes of ending the human suffering caused by what is perhaps one of the most broken industries on the planet: information technology.

But it’s not only the information technology industry that is “broken”.  Menlo, by being very public about its culture, is saying to the world that no organization has to have a cheerless, hard-driving workplace. Businesses don’t have to be controlling, demeaning, punitive, and energy-depleting. They don’t have to be bureaucratic and authoritarian; managed by an org chart and powered by position. By explaining how Menlo works with clients, estimates costs, organizes work assignments, develops teams and leaders, and ensures quality, Sheridan provides a guidebook for creating joy in any organization.  

The success of the company doesn’t mean there haven’t been problems and challenges along the way. One of the things I like about the book is that Sheridan lets the reader in on things they did with employees, with processes, and with clients that didn’t go well. I won’t call them “mistakes” or “failures” because those aren’t terms that fit Menlo. Everything they do is an opportunity for learning. When something doesn’t go as well as intended, they use that experience to improve.

After reading Joy, Inc. and visiting the company on several occasions, I believe the key to Menlo’s success is its “learning culture”.  This is an intentional culture a la Edgar Schein's three levels: (1) the deep underlying beliefs and assumptions that are often difficult for insiders to articulate; (2) the values and principles that structure action; and (3) the symbols and artifacts that are visible on the surface for all to see. In the Menlo culture the message to employees, both implicitly and explicitly, is that we are learning together how to best serve our clients while creating an enjoyable and meaningful work environment. The “rituals and artifacts” that Sheridan describes in Joy, Inc. contribute to creating this culture: from the hiring process when prospective employees learn how to fit into Menlo, to the paired employees who learn how to work together on job tasks, to constant conversations during the workday, to lunch n’learns, to storytelling, to leaders setting an example for continuous learning, and to speaking about The Menlo Way to other companies and to the public. The value placed on the joy of learning comes through loud and clear to employees and observers. 

 

Customer Satisfaction: Gaming the System

When it comes to measuring customer satisfaction, managers are gaming the system. They are advising customers to answer survey questions in a way that makes the manager look good, i.e., a rating of 5 on a 5-point scale. Rather than trying to improve the customer experience, they are trying to improve their scores.

I understand their motivation. An executive in a central office or a hired survey company might be collecting this data and drawing conclusions about customer service in a location that they may or may not have visited and probably know little. Sometimes the data folks understand the business and sometimes they don’t. Sometimes they understand what customers mean by a particular rating and sometimes they don’t. Sometimes they ask valid and reliable questions and sometimes they don’t. A phone company service technician once pleaded with me not to send a compliment to his supervisor because the “system” counts every comment from a customer as a complaint and it would go against him.

William Grimes, in a column for the N.Y. Times, writes:

In the auto industry, which tries to measure customer satisfaction at every possible stage, from the first tentative Web search to the last service visit, the assessment ritual can become a kind of performance.

Sales representatives have been known to show pictures of their wives and children as they plead for a favorable review in their dealership’s satisfaction survey. Some show their customers a sample survey already ticked off with top marks in every rating category. Dealers sometimes throw in a free tank of gas or a free oil change as a quid pro quo.

Pressure tactics have crept into other industries as well. Cable technicians, after completing an installation or repair, often call into the head office to report and then hand their cellphone over to the customer for a quick round of questioning about the service, an awkward conversation with the technician standing a few feet away.

Sales clerks who once concluded a transaction with “Have a nice day” now plead with customers to fill out surveys and award good marks because “my job depends on it.”

This is a sign I observed on the checkout counter of a CVS/Pharmacy:

Clearly, this store is trying to influence ratings, not by improving customer service but my pleading for leniency.

I’ve written before about helpdesk employees who, at the end of a phone inquiry, ask customers to report that they were highly satisfied with the service.

Encouraging a particular rating does not tell you what customers really think. You have to ask yourself, “Do I want high ratings or do I want to know the truth?” Customers might tell you what they think you want to hear and then not buy again and not recommend your product and services to others.

Zingerman’s, which is well known for creating an outstanding customer experience, says in its training video that most customers don’t like to complain. By discouraging negative comments a company only makes customers more uncomfortable and more likely to misrepresent what they really think. Then managers will not hear what they need to hear.

If you want to improve performance, ask customers for feedback in a safe and neutral way. If you don’t care about improving performance, don’t ask for feedback. 

Related articles

Customer Service Run Amok

Ecommerce: One Size Does Not Fit All

Ecommerce: One Size Does Not Fit All

Why do online shopping experiences have to be so difficult? It’s as if companies forget everything they know about customer service when they build a Web site.  The IT wizards work their magic behind a curtain and the marketing and sales folks accept whatever bells and whistles are handed to them.

A New York Times article about online books quotes Peter Meyers, author of “Breaking the Page,” as saying:

A lot of these [Web-based] solutions were born out of a programmer’s ability to do something rather than the reader’s enthusiasm for things they need.  We pursued distractions and called them enhancements.

This seems to describe much of what goes on in Web site development today. The gap between an elegant Web site from an IT point-of-view and the quality of experience from a customer’s point-of-view appears to be as wide as ever. The recent flap about the Obamacare Web site (www.HealthCare.gov ) and the Web-based "Common Application" (www.commonapp.org) for college admissions are just two examples. If the developers of these sites had started with a great customer experience being the end-goal, they might not have had the launch problems that occurred.

Eszter Hargittai, professor of communication studies at Northwestern University, writes:

What may be completely intuitive actions for Web designers and engineers are far from the norm for those who only use the Web occasionally and mainly do so to correspond with family members once in a while on Facebook or by email.

All organizations whether government, business, or nonprofit, need to design the Web experience for the customer, not for IT. Engaging with the Web site should be an emotionally positive experience as well as result in a successful transaction. It’s not enough to have the right boxes, right forms, and right buttons. Customers want to feel the same dignity, respect, and trust that they feel in a well-run store, restaurant, or entertainment venue.

This is not easy. I know from my own experience developing Learning2BGreat an ecommerce Web site, that trial and error, based on feedback from customers, is part of the process. What’s important is keeping the goal in mind. Is it to have something that is technically sophisticated or is it to have something that customers enjoy using? I’ve caught myself more than once being so excited about functionality that I lost sight of the goal.

Web site developers could learn much from Zingerman’s approach to the customer experience. Zingerman’s is a deli and gourmet food retailer that Inc. Magazine calls “the coolest small company in America” and is included in Bo Burlinghan’s book, Small Giants. After 25 years and many mistakes and successes, the company has figured out how to create a great customer experience. First of all, they take a one-customer-at-a-time approach. Staff have rules but they also break the rules when it meets the needs of a customer. They have processes but when a moment-of-truth arises, they do what they need to do to keep a customer coming back.

This kind of customer service is a challenge for Web sites that are intended to work exactly the same way for every customer and collect and disseminate exactly the same user information. However, they don’t and shouldn’t. This is what managers need to realize. They need to work with IT to develop a site that adapts to the needs of users from different backgrounds, motivations, and abilities. One-size-fits-all might work for ball caps but it doesn’t work for the user experience. 

Culture Change and Leadership

The culture of a company is shaped by the values and behaviors of its leaders. In an interview that N.Y. Times columnist Adam Bryant had with Vocalocity CEO Wain Kellum, we see how one leader’s values influence the culture of an organization.

In answer to an interview question, Kellum said:

There are some core tenets about culture that you have to have to be successful, but then the
nuances of it vary dramatically. One tenet is that you have to have a core belief in others and a respect for the individual. It’s about how you listen to each other, because I think that teams have the best ideas, not individuals. If people don’t share that belief, they need to go work somewhere else.

Another one is to embrace diversity, because people from different cultures and different backgrounds communicate in different ways. If you don’t learn how to embrace diversity in a context of respect, oftentimes you lose the best ideas and the best thinking.

The third one is that people have to sign on to the belief that we have to grow — not just growing revenues, but people have to want to grow as individuals. If you buy into growth, then you buy into being open to feedback.

If I’m hired into a company, my first priority is to help people understand that things are going to change quickly. The more people absorb the fact that things have to change, the less likely they are to hang on to the way they used to be. You also really empower people who want to step up to be part of the new thing.

If a company is bringing me in, they have less than optimal performance, which means you always have a people problem. Sometimes people just need more help. They need more focus, they need more structure, they need more feedback on what they’re doing.

Sometimes people are just in the wrong job. Some of those people are in the wrong company. People who want to win care about me weeding out the people who are not contributing their fair share. But they also watch very closely how you let somebody go, and how you treat them.

The experience of Andrea Whitmer, a customer of Vocalocity who happens to be a blogger, suggests that the actions of the company are aligned with Kellum’s values. Kellum says he values respect for individuals, growth and change, and helping people get into the right jobs. This alignment is evident in customer service and quality of the products that Whitmer reviewed. Of course, this is the experience of only one person, and someone who is pretty clear about what she needs from Vocalocity. However, there is no doubt that the company is trying to create a culture consistent with the values of its leader. 

Customer Service Run Amok

I’m afraid we are witnessing a trend in customer service that signals the end of a short-lived focus on the customer. Call me old-fashioned, but I think this is a huge mistake on the part of companies that want to retain customers in a highly competitive environment.  Not everyone wants to talk to an automated phone service or talk to a customer service rep who acts like a robot.

I recently called the “customer service and support” phone number of a leading telecommunications company in the U.S. I was inquiring about a charge on my bill that I didn’t understand and I also wanted to arrange automatic payment of my bill. Now, you’d think that a company that size would have state-of-the-art, world-class customer service.  That was not my experience.

First of all, it took me 20 minutes to find the right number to call. I started with the main customer service number which took me to a list of automated options, none of which described my problem. When I finally reached a live human voice, I heard the person say, “How can we make you feel like a valued customer today?” That’s a good start, but then we proceeded to have a conversation filled with lines like:

• "I will go the extra mile to solve this problem."
• "I appreciate your patience so much."
• "Whatever it takes I will make this right for you."
• "I appreciate your patience so much."
• "I will stay on the line until you are satisfied."
• "I appreciate your patience so much."
• "It is my goal to make sure you are a satisfied customer today."
• "I appreciate your patience so much."
• "Thank you for being the best part of [company name]."

At one point in our conversation, this rep had to leave for a few minutes to check on a request and when she returned she started saying these lines all over again.  I might as well have been talking to HAL. And then, to top things off, I got this question, “Would you say that I treated you well during this call today?” This question reminded me of the car salesmen that I once had who ended the sale by asking me to give him a high rating when I received the JD Power survey. Obviously, measures of customer satisfaction are figuring more into performance reviews than they used to. But I can’t evaluate service until I see if the problem has been solved or, in the case of the car dealer, my new car has been delivered as promised.

Now, in fairness, I might have been talking to a new customer service rep who had been asked to use a script until she could integrate the intent of the statements into her own words. However, in recent weeks, I have had similar conversations with customer service reps in three different leading telecommunications companies, all using a similar set of statements over and over again.

I worry that customer service, for the sake of efficiency, is becoming so automated and routinized that the words are meaningless and the service is annoying and frustrating. Poor customer service is symptomatic of a company culture that espouses excellence but, in practice, only does things that reduce cost and increase efficiency. Telecommunications companies, in particular, would do well to heed the advice of J. Higgins:

1. Listen to customers; pay attention so you can resolve the problem as the customer views it
2. Apologize once for the problem and then get on with solving it
3. Only promise what you can deliver
4. Make it easy for customers to get back to you if they have more questions or want to check on progress
5. Make learning about providing excellent customer service a continuous, on-going process
6. Always be respectful of customers